Search Decisions

Decision Text

ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080016069
Original file (20080016069.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

		IN THE CASE OF:	  

		BOARD DATE:	  19 February 2009

		DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20080016069 


THE BOARD CONSIDERED THE FOLLOWING EVIDENCE:

1.  Application for correction of military records (with supporting documents provided, if any).

2.  Military Personnel Records and advisory opinions (if any).


THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE:

1.  The applicant requests, in effect, that her under other than honorable conditions (UOTHC) discharge be upgraded to an honorable discharge (HD). 

2.  The applicant states, in effect, that she was placed in an absent without leave (AWOL) status while being treated in a Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) hospital and when she returned, she was never taken out of an AWOL status.  

3.  The applicant refers to VA records; however, she provides no additional documentary evidence in support of her application.  

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  The applicant's record shows that she served on active duty in the Regular Army (RA) for 11 years, 8 months, and 10 days, from 25 July 1985 through 
4 April 1997, at which time she was honorably discharged, in the rank of staff sergeant (SSG), by reason of parenthood.

2.  On 30 May 2001, while serving as a member of the United States Army Reserve (USAR), in the rank of SSG, the applicant was ordered to active duty in the Active Guard Reserve (AGR) program for 3 years.  

3.  The applicant's record shows she accrued 434 days of time lost due to 
being AWOL during four separate periods between 13 May 2003 and 24 October 2004.

4.  The applicant's record is void of a separation packet containing the specific facts and circumstances surrounding her discharge processing.  The record does contain a DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) that shows that on 10 November 2004 the applicant was separated under the provisions of Paragraph 14-12b, Army Regulation 635-200, by reason of 
pattern of misconduct, and that she received an UOTHC discharge.  The 
DD Form 214 also shows she completed 2 years, 2 months, and 21 days of creditable active military service during the period covered by the DD Form 214 
(30 May 2001-10 November 2004) and that she accrued 434 days of time lost.  The applicant authenticated this document with her signature.

5.  On 19 April 2006, the Army Discharge Review Board (ADRB) considered the applicant's case at a personal appearance hearing.  The applicant was present and testified at the hearing.  After carefully examining the applicant's record during the period of enlistment under review and hearing the testimony provided by the applicant, the ADRB determined the applicant's discharge was proper and equitable, and voted not to upgrade the applicant's discharge.   

6.  Army Regulation 635-200 (Active Duty Enlisted Administrative Separations) sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel.  Chapter 14 establishes policy and prescribes procedures for separating members for misconduct.  Specific categories include minor disciplinary infractions, a pattern of misconduct, commission of a serious offense, and convictions by civil authorities.  Action will be taken to separate a member for misconduct when it is clearly established that rehabilitation is impracticable or is unlikely to succeed.  Although an UOTHC discharge is normally appropriate for a Soldier discharged under this chapter, the separation authority may issue a general discharge (GD) or HD if warranted by the member's overall record of service.  

7.  Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 3-7a, provides that an honorable discharge is a separation with honor and entitles the recipient to benefits provided by law.  The honorable characterization is appropriate when the quality of the member’s service generally has met the standards of acceptable conduct and performance of duty for Army personnel (emphasis added), or is otherwise 
so meritorious that any other characterization would be clearly inappropriate.  

8.  Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 3-7b, provides that a general discharge is a separation from the Army under honorable conditions.  When authorized, it is issued to a Soldier whose military record is satisfactory but not sufficiently 

meritorious to warrant an honorable discharge.  A characterization of under honorable conditions may be issued only when the reason for the Soldier’s separation specifically allows such characterization.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant's contention that she was erroneously charged with being AWOL while she being treated in a VA hospital was carefully considered.  However, there is insufficient evidence to support this claim.  

2.  The applicant's record is void of a separation packet containing the facts and circumstances surrounding her discharge processing.  However, it does contain a properly constituted DD Form 214 that identifies the authority and reason for her discharge and this document carries a presumption of regularity in the discharge process.  

3.  Absent any evidence of record or independent evidence provided by the applicant that confirms she was erroneously charged with being AWOL or that there was any error or injustice in the separation process, it is concluded that the applicant's separation was accomplished in accordance with the applicable regulation, that requirements of law and regulation were met, and that the rights of the applicant were fully protected throughout her separation processing.  

4.  In order to justify correction of a military record the applicant must show to the satisfaction of the Board, or it must otherwise satisfactorily appear, that the record is in error or unjust.  The applicant has failed to submit evidence that would satisfy this requirement.

BOARD VOTE:

________  ________  ________  GRANT FULL RELIEF 

________  ________  ________  GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF 

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

___x____  ___x____  ___x____  DENY APPLICATION

BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION:

The evidence presented does not demonstrate the existence of a probable error or injustice.  Therefore, the Board determined that the overall merits of this case are insufficient as a basis for correction of the records of the individual concerned.




      _______x _   _______   ___
               CHAIRPERSON
      
I certify that herein is recorded the true and complete record of the proceedings of the Army Board for Correction of Military Records in this case.
ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20080016069



3


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20080016069



2


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

Similar Decisions

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080006978

    Original file (20080006978.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Application for correction of military records (with supporting documents provided, if any). The record does include a properly constituted separation document (DD Form 214) that shows she was discharged under the provisions of chapter 10, Army Regulation 635-200, in lieu of trial by court-martial, on 20 July 1981. An under other than honorable conditions (UOTHC) discharge normally is appropriate for a Soldier who is discharged in lieu of trial by court-martial.

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090001572

    Original file (20090001572.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 31 March 1999, after carefully considering the applicant’s application, her military records, and all other available evidence, the Army Discharge Review Board (ADRB) determined the applicant’s characterization of service and the reason for discharge were proper and equitable, and voted not to change either the characterization of service or the reason for discharge. Chapter 10 provides, in pertinent part, that a member who has committed an offense or offenses for which the authorized...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100000155

    Original file (20100000155.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Application for correction of military records (with supporting documents provided, if any). The applicant’s DA Form 2-1 (Personnel Qualification Record) shows in Item 18 (Appointments and Reductions) that she was promoted to specialist four (SP4)/E-4 on 2 February 1982, and this was the highest rank she attained while serving on active duty. It also shows she was separated under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations - Enlisted Personnel), paragraph 14-12b, with...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090021187

    Original file (20090021187.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant requests her under other than honorable conditions (UOTHC) discharge be upgraded to an honorable discharge (HD) and correction of her reentry (RE) code. However, it does include a properly-constituted DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) that was issued to the applicant on 13 March 1981 showing she was discharged under the provisions of chapter 10, Army Regulation 635-200, by reason of “Administrative discharge conduct triable by Court-Martial”...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2006 | 20060012854

    Original file (20060012854.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    x The Board considered the following evidence: Exhibit A - Application for correction of military records. The record does contain a DD Form 214 that shows on 25 March 1974, the applicant was separated under the provisions of Chapter 10, Army Regulation 635-200, for the good of the service in lieu of trial by court-martial, and that she received an UD. There is no indication in the record that the applicant applied to the Army Discharge Review Board for an upgrade of her discharge within...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090002343

    Original file (20090002343.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Application for correction of military records (with supporting documents provided, if any). The FSM's record shows that he enlisted in the Regular Army (RA) on 11 April 1966 and was honorably discharged on 14 March 19068 for the purpose of immediate reenlistment. Further, the applicant should note that her father's honorable service between 11 April 1966 and 14 March 1968, is properly documented in the DD Form 214 the FSM was issued on 14 March 1968.

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090003698

    Original file (20090003698.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Application for correction of military records (with supporting documents provided, if any). However, the record does include a DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) that shows he was separated under the provisions of Chapter 10, Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations – Enlisted Personnel), for the good of the service, and that he received an UOTHC on 11 April 1983. The regulation does allow the issue of a general, under honorable conditions discharge...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080017929

    Original file (20080017929.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    During its original review of the case, the Board determined the applicant's discharge processing was accomplished in accordance with the applicable law and regulation, and that her UOTHC discharge was commensurate with the authority for her discharge. Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 3-7b, provides that a general discharge is a separation from the Army under honorable conditions. There is no evidence that the offenses committed by the applicant that resulted in the court-martial...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | 20110014984

    Original file (20110014984.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Application for correction of military records (with supporting documents provided, if any). The record does include a properly-constituted DD Form 214 that shows the applicant was discharged for the good of the service in lieu of trial by court-martial under the provisions of chapter 10, Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations). There is no evidence of record showing the applicant suffered from PTSD or any other medical or mental condition that contributed to the misconduct that...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090010207

    Original file (20090010207.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    Application for correction of military records (with supporting documents provided, if any). However, the record does include a DD Form 214 (Report of Separation from Active Duty) that shows he was separated under the provisions of chapter 10, Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations), for the good of the service and that he received a discharge under other than honorable conditions (UOTHC) on 4 August 1971. In this case, although the death of his daughter was tragic, it alone did...