Search Decisions

Decision Text

ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090012750
Original file (20090012750.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

		IN THE CASE OF:	

		BOARD DATE:	  4 February 2010

		DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20090012750 


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, in effect, that court-martial charges were preferred against him for adultery and having his girlfriend living with him in government quarters.  The applicant states at this time he was dealing with the loss of his son and father.  The applicant states that his post commander told him that the court-martial charges would be dropped if he married his girlfriend.  The applicant continues that he married his girlfriend as suggested, but he was charged instead.  

3.  The applicant further states that during the court-martial proceedings he was told if he requested separation from the military for the good of the service that he would receive an honorable discharge from the post commander.  Had he known at the time that the post commander had no intentions of issuing him an honorable discharge he would have had the court-martial instead.  

4.  The applicant provides no additional documentation in support of this case.

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 enlisted in the Regular Army on 28 March 1977 and successfully completed basic combat and advanced individual training.  He was awarded military occupational specialty 12B (Combat Engineer).

3.  On 21 August 1980, the applicant accepted nonjudicial punishment (NJP) under Article 15, Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) for failure to be at his appointed place of duty.

4. On 14 August 1981, the applicant accepted NJP under Article 15 UCMJ for failure to be at his appointed place of duty.

5.  A DD Form 458 (Charge Sheet), dated 3 May 1982, shows court-martial charges were preferred against the applicant for:

   a.  having sexual intercourse with a woman not his wife;
   
   b.  cohabitating with a woman not his wife;
   
   c.  unlawfully obtaining the use of government quarters; and 
   
   d.  falsifying an official document “Application for and Assignment to Military Family Housing.”

6.  On 10 June 1982, after consulting with counsel, the applicant submitted a request for discharge for the good of the service under the provisions of chapter 10 of Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations – Enlisted Personnel).  The applicant indicated in his request that he understood he could be discharged under other than honorable conditions, that he may be deprived of many or all Army benefits, that he may be ineligible for many or all benefits administered by the Veterans Administration (VA), and that he may be deprived of his rights and benefits as a veteran under both Federal and State law.  He also acknowledged that he may expect to encounter substantial prejudice in civilian life.  He waived the right to provide a statement in his own behalf.

7.  On 28 June 1982, the appropriate authority approved the applicant's request for discharge for the good of the service under the provisions of chapter 10 of Army Regulation 635-200.  He directed that the applicant be issued an Under Other Than Honorable Conditions Discharge Certificate.  

8.  On 21 July 1982, the applicant was discharged with a characterization of service of under other than honorable conditions.  He had completed a total of 
5 years, 3 months, and 24 days of creditable active service.

9.  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, submit a request for discharge for the good of the service in lieu of trial by court-martial.  The request may be submitted at any time after charges have been preferred and must include the individual's admission of guilt.  Although an honorable or general discharge is authorized, a discharge under other than honorable conditions is normally considered appropriate.

10.  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.  

11.  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 contends that his discharge should be upgraded to an honorable discharge because he was told that the post commander would drop the charges against him and issue him an honorable discharge.  There is no evidence in his records and he has not provided any evidence that shows the post commander would drop the charges against him and issue him an honorable discharge.  Unfortunately, in the absence of evidence of record or of any evidence submitted by the applicant there is an insufficient basis to support this argument.  Furthermore, evidence of record shows that he voluntarily requested to be separated from the military in lieu of court-martial.  Therefore, there is no basis for granting the applicant's requested relief.

2.  Evidence shows the applicant was properly and equitably discharged in accordance with the regulations in effect at the time.  Lacking evidence to the contrary, it is determined that all requirements of law and regulations were met and the rights of the applicant were fully protected throughout the separation process.

3.  The applicant's records show that he received two Article 15s and had charges preferred against him for having sexual intercourse with a woman not his wife, for cohabitating with a woman not his wife, for unlawfully obtaining the use of government quarters, and falsifying an official document before his separation. Based on these facts, the applicant’s service clearly did not meet the standards of acceptable conduct and performance of duty for Army personnel which are required for issuance of an honorable or a general discharge.

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)                                         AR20090012750





3


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20090012750



2


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

Similar Decisions

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100021171

    Original file (20100021171.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant states his DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) shows he received an under other than honorable conditions discharge. In his request for discharge, he indicated that he understood that by requesting discharge he was admitting guilt to the charges against him or of a lesser included offense that also authorized the imposition of a bad conduct discharge or a discharge under other honorable conditions. The DD Form 214 he was issued shows he was...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2015 | 20150009022

    Original file (20150009022.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    He further stated they had been living together for 7 or 8 months when she started threatening him, he was separated from his wife at that time, and he did have sex with her. c. Applications for the transfer or removal of an Article 15 from the OMPF based on an error or injustice will be made to the Army Board for Corrections of Military Records (ABCMR). This regulation also provides that documents in the restricted folder of the OMPF are those that must be permanently kept to maintain an...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090011982

    Original file (20090011982.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    During the board of officers' proceedings, the following was recorded: "After a lengthy discussion concerning whether the sworn statements should be admitted as opposed to witnesses appearing in person to testify, the board president said after he and the board members had reviewed the statements, he would make a determination. The board of officers recommended that the applicant be discharged with a UOTHC discharge. The applicant states his commander asked him to accept a medical...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090009817

    Original file (20090009817.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 18 June 2007, the applicant was separated under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 10, in lieu of trial by court-martial with an under other than honorable conditions discharge. Pertinent Army regulations provide that prior to discharge or release from active duty individuals will be assigned RE codes based on their service records or the reason for discharge. This chapter includes a list of armed forces RE codes, including Regular Army RE codes.

  • AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-01739

    Original file (BC-2006-01739.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    He receive a Presidential pardon removing his court-martial conviction and bad conduct discharge (BCD) from his record. The discharge was within the discretion of the discharge authority and the applicant did not submit any evidence or identify any errors or injustices that occurred in the discharge processing. As such, applicant's request for a Presidential pardon is not possible since such action is not within the purview of this Board's authority.

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2001 | 2001062250C070421

    Original file (2001062250C070421.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    He was given a date of discharge of 4 June 1991. In any case, his resignation for the good of the service was forwarded to Headquarters, Department of the Army on 28 March 1991 and the AD HOC Review Board recommended the applicant’s resignation be accepted with a discharge UOTHC on 8 April 1991. His January 1991 physical was accomplished incident to retirement, discharge, or release from active duty (i.e., what he hoped would be a physical disability separation) and noted in detail his...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140011369

    Original file (20140011369.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant requests an upgrade of his discharge under other than honorable conditions to a general discharge. On 28 August 1987, the separation authority approved the applicant's voluntary request for discharge and directed the issuance of a discharge under other than honorable conditions. He was 21 years old when he enlisted in 1981.

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100019242

    Original file (20100019242.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant's records show he enlisted in the Regular Army on 13 May 1997. Army policy states that an under other than honorable conditions discharge is normally considered appropriate for a Soldier discharged for patterns of misconduct; however, the discharge authority may direct an honorable or general discharge if such are merited by the Soldier's overall record. The SPD Code of "JKQ" is the correct Code for Soldiers separating under chapter 14-12c of Army Regulation 635-200 by reason...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2013 | 20130015450

    Original file (20130015450.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Finally, after Officer Basic Course graduation without him and after witness testimonial was taken, they called him to charge him for rape, sodomy, and adultery. c. He went to the Article 32 proceedings and after the final report, the investigating officer recommended dropping the charge of rape. Paragraph 3-13, rules for processing resignation for the good of the Service in lieu of general court-martial, states an officer may submit a resignation for the good of the Service (RFGOS) in...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090004985

    Original file (20090004985.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant requests that his under other than honorable conditions discharge be upgraded to an honorable discharge. On 28 January 1964, the applicant was honorably discharged after serving 1 year, 3 months, and 7 days of honorable active duty service. Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 3-7b, provides that a general discharge is a separation from the Army under honorable conditions.