IN THE CASE OF:	  

		BOARD DATE:	       1 JULY 2009

		DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20090003284 


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 that his under other than honorable conditions discharge be upgraded.

2.  The applicant states that his discharge has affected him personally and professionally.  He maintains that he is at a point in his life where amends need to be made for the wrongs he has done.  The applicant states that he realizes that he was born with an allergy to alcohol.  He offers that he is a true alcoholic and without total abstinence and a twelve-step program in his life, he would have died long ago.  The applicant adds that he is proud to be a Gulf War Veteran, but always felt ashamed about how he acted when he was in the Army. 

3.  The applicant provides four supporting statements and a copy his DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty).

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  Title 10, U.S. Code, section 1552(b), provides that applications for correction of military records must be filed within 3 years after discovery of the alleged error or injustice.  This provision of law also allows the Army Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR) to excuse an applicant’s failure to timely file within the 3-year statute of limitations if the ABCMR determines it would be in the interest of justice to do so.  While it appears the applicant did not file within the time frame provided in the statute of limitations, the ABCMR has elected to conduct a 

substantive review of this case and, only to the extent relief, if any, is granted, has determined it is in the interest of justice to excuse the applicant’s failure to timely file.  In all other respects, there are insufficient bases to waive the statute of limitations for timely filing.

2.  The applicant’s record shows he enlisted in the Regular Army (RA) and entered active duty on 3 January 1989.  He was 20 1/2 years of age at the time of enlistment.

3.  On 28 July 1991, charges were preferred against the applicant for three specifications of being absent without leave (AWOL) from his unit,
C Battery, 3d Battalion, 8th Field Artillery Regiment, Fort Bragg, North Carolina (28 June 1991 to 1 July 1991, 3 July 1991 to 24 July 1991, and 26 July 1991 to 28 July 1991).  He was also charged with disobeying a lawful command from his superior commissioned officer and breaking restriction.

4.  On 30 July 1991, at the request of the command, the applicant underwent a mental status evaluation and was psychiatrically cleared for any administrative action deemed appropriate by the command, to include pre-trial confinement.  There is no mention of the applicant’s drinking problem or any evidence to show that the applicant’s disciplinary problems were alcohol-related. 

5.  On 31 July 1991, the applicant consulted with counsel and voluntarily requested a discharge for the good of the service - in lieu of trial by court-martial under the provisions of chapter 10 of Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations - Enlisted Personnel).

6.  On the same day, the applicant signed his request for discharge which showed that he was making the request under his own free will; that he understood the elements of the offenses charged and admitted guilt; that he was afforded the opportunity to speak with counsel; that he may be furnished with an Under Other Than Honorable Conditions Discharge Certificate; that he may be deprived of many or all Army benefits; that he may be ineligible for many or all Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) benefits; and that he may expect to encounter substantial prejudice in civilian life because of an Under Other Than Honorable Conditions Discharge Certificate.  The applicant elected not to submit a statement in his behalf.

7.  On 22 August 1991, the Commander, Headquarters, XVIII Airborne Corps, Fort Bragg, approved the recommendation for discharge under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 10.  He directed that the applicant be discharged under other than honorable conditions and that he be reduced to the grade of
E-1, unless already serving in that grade. 
8.  Accordingly, on 11 September 1991, the applicant was discharged with an under other than honorable conditions discharge in the grade of E-1.  He was credited with 2 years, 6 months, and 26 days of creditable active service with
1 month and 20 days of time lost. 

9.  There is no indication in the record that the applicant applied to the Army Discharge Review Board (ADRB) for an upgrade of his discharge within the
15-year statute of limitations of that board.  

10.  The applicant submitted the following letters in support of his application:

	a.  Site Security Supervisor and Site Manager, Mulligan Security.  These individuals attest to the applicant’s outstanding job performance, dependability, and professionalism.  The Site Security Supervisor opined that it was the applicant’s outstanding work ethics that contributed to his (the applicant's) promotion in October 2007.  Both individuals state he currently continues to perform in an outstanding and professional manner.

   b.  The applicant’s spouse provided a supporting statement in which she stated that prior to their marriage, the applicant told her about how his drinking ruined his military career and forced him out of the Army.  She argued that the applicant is not the same person he was in the military.  She states that he is a good, responsible husband who works hard to support his family to the best of his ability.

   c.  A friend states that he has known the applicant for about 15 years and he [applicant] has always attended Alcoholics Anonymous (AA).  He offered that the applicant’s behavior while in the Army was due to his excessive drinking.  He added that the applicant has since matured and has put AA in his life.  He states the applicant is now married and realizes that the marriage will work if he remains rational, kind, and mature.  He concluded that the applicant’s new way of life and his respectful attitude should play a strong role in his discharge being upgraded.

11.  Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel.  Chapter 10 of that regulation provides, in pertinent part, that a member who has committed an offense or offenses for which the authorized punishment includes a punitive discharge may, at any time after the charges have been preferred, submit a request for discharge for the good of the service in lieu of trial by court-martial.  At the time, an under other than honorable conditions discharge was normally considered appropriate. 


12.  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.

13.  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 argues, in effect, that his discharge should be upgraded because he was an alcoholic and he has since turned his life around.   There is no evidence in the records that show the applicant had a drinking problem when he entered the military and/or sought counseling to correct this problem.  Therefore, the applicant's contention that his drinking led to his indiscipline is not sufficient as a basis for upgrading his discharge.

2.  Additionally, the fact that the applicant has stopped drinking, attends AA, and is putting his life together is commendable.  However, good post-service conduct alone is not a basis for upgrading his discharge.

3.  Evidence of record confirms that all requirements of law and regulation were met and the applicant’s rights were fully protected throughout the separation process.  The record further shows the applicant’s discharge accurately reflects his overall record of service.  

4.  The applicant’s record of indiscipline does not meet the standards of acceptable conduct and performance of duty for Army personnel.  Therefore, he is not entitled to a discharge upgrade on the basis that the discharge has “affected him personally and professionally.”

5.  In view of the foregoing, there is no basis for granting the applicant's request.





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.



      _________XXX_____________
               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)                                         AR20090003284



3


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20090003284



5


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1