Search Decisions

Decision Text

ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090013048
Original file (20090013048.txt) Auto-classification: Denied


		BOARD DATE:	  27 October 2009

		DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20090013048 


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, an upgrade of his under other than honorable conditions discharge to an honorable discharge.

2.  The applicant states, in effect, that he was under tremendous mental and physical exhaustion and his judgment was clouded when he went absent without leave (AWOL).  He further states he regrets going AWOL all those years and if he could do it all over again he would handle it differently.

3.  The applicant provides a self-authored letter, a DD Form 293 (Application for the Review of Discharge), and two DD Forms 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) in support of his application.

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 on 21 May 1980.  His record shows that he was trained in and awarded military occupational specialty (MOS) 12B (Combat Engineer).

3.  The applicant's records document no acts of valor or significant achievement.

4.  Item 21 (Time Lost) of the applicant's DA Form 2-1 (Personnel Qualification Record) shows he was AWOL during the periods 6 July to 7 August 1984 and    23 August 1984 to 17 April 1986.

5.  The applicant’s records contain a DD Form 458 (Charge Sheet), dated 30 April 1986, which indicates he was charged with being AWOL during the period 23 August 1984 to 18 April 1986.

6.  On 30 April 1986, the applicant consulted with legal counsel and he was advised of the basis for the contemplated trial by court-martial, the maximum permissible punishment authorized under the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ), the possible effects of an other than honorable conditions discharge, and of the procedures and rights that were available to him.  Subsequent to receiving this legal counsel, the applicant voluntarily requested discharge for the good of the service in lieu of trial by court-martial.

7.  In his request for discharge, the applicant indicated that he understood by requesting discharge he was admitting guilt to the charge against him or of a lesser included offense and that the imposition of a bad conduct or dishonorable discharge was authorized.  He further acknowledged he understood that if his discharge request was approved, he could be deprived of many or all Army benefits, that he could be ineligible for many or all benefits administered by the Veterans Administration (VA), and that he could be deprived of his rights and benefits as a veteran under both Federal and State law.

8.  On 21 October 1986, the separation authority approved the applicant's request for discharge and directed that he receive an under other than honorable conditions discharge.  On 5 December 1986, the applicant was discharged accordingly.  The DD Form 214 he was issued at the time confirms he completed a total 4 years, 9 months, and 14 days of creditable active military service and he had 636 days of lost time due to being AWOL.

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

10.  Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations) sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel.  Chapter 10 of the version in effect at the time provided that a member who committed an offense or offenses for which the authorized punishment included a punitive discharge could submit a request for discharge for the good of the service at any time after court-martial charges were preferred.  Commanders would ensure that an individual was not coerced into submitting a request for discharge for the good of the service.  Consulting counsel would advise the member concerning the elements of the offense or offenses charged, the type of discharge normally given under the provisions of this chapter, the loss of VA benefits, and the possibility of prejudice in civilian life because of the characterization of such a discharge.  A discharge under other than honorable conditions is normally given.

11.  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.

12.  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 his under other than honorable conditions discharge should be upgraded to honorable because he regrets going AWOL and he was under tremendous mental and physical exhaustion, was carefully considered.  However, the applicant's post service remorse for committing a UCMJ offense punishable with a punitive discharge is not sufficiently mitigating to warrant the upgrade of his discharge 

2.  The applicant's record shows he was charged with the commission of an offense punishable under the UCMJ with a punitive discharge.  Discharges under the provisions of chapter 10 of Army Regulation 635-200 are voluntary requests for discharge in lieu of trial by court-martial.  All requirements of law and regulation were met and the rights of the applicant were fully protected throughout the separation process.  Further, the applicant's discharge accurately reflects his overall record of service.
3.  Based on his record of indiscipline which includes two periods of AWOL totaling 636 days of lost time, the applicant's service clearly does not meet the standards of acceptable conduct and performance of duty for Army personnel.  This misconduct also renders his service unsatisfactory.  Therefore, the applicant is not entitled to an honorable discharge.

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)                                         AR20090013048



2


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

Similar Decisions

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090018542

    Original file (20090018542.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 31 July 1986, the appropriate authority approved the applicant's request for discharge for the good of the service. The applicant was advised at the time he requested discharge that he may be ineligible for VA benefits based on the characterization of his discharge. In view of the foregoing, the evidence is insufficient for upgrading the applicant's discharge to a general discharge under honorable conditions or an honorable discharge.

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140012603

    Original file (20140012603.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Application for correction of military records (with supporting documents provided, if any). On 14 February 1986, the separation authority approved the applicant's request for discharge and directed his discharge under other than honorable conditions. Based on his record of indiscipline, which included violations of the UCMJ that resulted in preferred court-martial charges and nonjudicial punishment, and in view of the fact that he voluntarily requested discharge to avoid a trial by...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140005414

    Original file (20140005414.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant requests, in effect, his under other than honorable conditions be upgraded to an honorable discharge. Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 3-7b, states a general discharge is a separation from the Army under honorable conditions. Further, the applicant's discharge accurately reflects his overall record of service 3.

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100024310

    Original file (20100024310.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant requests upgrade of his under other than honorable conditions discharge to a general discharge. PFC A--- harassed him all the time. Upon his return to military control on 5 August 1986, he requested a discharge in lieu of facing a court-martial and acknowledged he could be discharged under conditions other than honorable.

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100024300

    Original file (20100024300.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant requests an upgrade of his under other than honorable conditions discharge. On 15 August 1986, the separation authority approved the applicant's request for discharge under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 10, for the good of the service - in lieu of trial by court-martial. The DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) he was issued shows he was discharged for the good of the service - in lieu of trial court-martial with a...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2013 | 20130005558

    Original file (20130005558.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant requests, in effect, that his discharge under other than honorable conditions (UOTHC) be upgraded to honorable. On 13 August 1984, the separation authority approved the applicant’s request for discharge and directed that he be issued a DD Form 794A (Discharge Certificate Under Other Than Honorable Conditions). The applicant contends, in effect, that his discharge UOTHC should be upgraded to honorable because he was young, scared, and made poor decisions.

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2013 | 20130002402

    Original file (20130002402.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant requests his under other than honorable conditions (UOTHC) discharge be upgraded. On 31 July 1986, the applicant consulted with counsel and after being advised of the basis for the contemplated trial by court-martial and the maximum permissible punishment under the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ), he voluntarily requested discharge for the good of the service in lieu of trial by courtmartial under the provisions chapter 10 of Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090003173

    Original file (20090003173.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE: 1. The applicant requests, in effect, that his 1986 discharge under other than honorable conditions be upgraded and that the basis for his separation be changed to disability. Additionally, an enlisted Soldier may not be referred for, or continue, physical disability processing when action has been started under any regulatory provision which authorizes a characterization of service of under other than honorable conditions unless the...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2005 | 20050002183C070206

    Original file (20050002183C070206.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 27 October 1972, the separation authority approved the applicant’s request for discharge and directed that he be furnished an undesirable discharge. Accordingly, the applicant was discharged with an undesirable discharge on 24 November 1972 under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 10, for the good of the service. The applicant’s voluntary request for separation under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 10, for the good of the service to avoid trial by...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080013940

    Original file (20080013940.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE: 1. The applicant requests, in effect, that his under other than honorable conditions discharge be upgraded. On 18 December 1986, the separation authority approved the applicant’s request for discharge and directed that he be issued an Under Other Than Honorable Conditions Discharge Certificate.