Search Decisions

Decision Text

ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090021688
Original file (20090021688.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

		IN THE CASE OF:	  

		BOARD DATE:	   13 July 2010

		DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20090021688 


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 an upgrade of his under other than honorable conditions (UOTHC) discharge to a general discharge.

2.  The applicant states he was young and did a lot of things for which he is ashamed.  However, he has turned over a new leaf and needs assistance from the Department of Veterans Affairs.

3.  The applicant does not provide any additional documents.

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 military records show that he enlisted in the Regular Army on 15 May 1979 at age 28.  He was awarded the military occupational specialty of light wheel vehicle/power generation mechanic.

3.  The applicant accepted nonjudicial punishment (NJP) under Article 15, Uniform Code of Military Justice, on four occasions for being drunk and disorderly and for four instances of being absent without leave.

4.  The applicant was convicted by civil authorities for numerous instances of writing bad checks.  The applicant was ultimately confined by civil authorities on 11 November 1980.

5.  On 21 October 1980, the applicant was notified by his commander of his intent to recommend his discharge due to misconduct, other acts or patterns of misconduct, and of his rights in conjunction with that recommendation.  The applicant requested counsel be appointed to assist him and requested a personal appearance before a board of officers.

6.  On 24 October 1980, the applicant's commander forwarded a recommendation to discharge the applicant.  In that letter, his commander stated the applicant had passed 22 to 25 bad checks to both military and civilian outlets totaling approximately $1,200.00 to $1,500.00.  His commander also mentioned two of the applicant's four NJP's and the fact that the applicant had requested a personal appearance before a board of officers.  On 19 February 1981, the applicant waived his right to counsel and his right to an administrative board.

7.  The recommendation was approved by the appropriate authority.  Accordingly, on 10 March 1981 the applicant was discharged UOTHC under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations), chapter 14, for misconduct for frequent incidents of discreditable nature with civil and military authorities/established pattern showing dishonorable failure to pay just debts.  He was 30 years old at that time.

8.  Army Regulation 635-200 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 a pattern of misconduct.  Action will be taken to separate a member for misconduct when it is clearly established that rehabilitation is impracticable or is unlikely to succeed.  Paragraph 1-18 specifies that Soldiers being considered for separation under the provisions of chapter 14 are entitled to have a board of officers consider their cases unless that right is waived.

9.  Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel.  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 was 28 years old when he enlisted and was 30 years old when he was discharged.  As such, his contention that he was young is not accepted.

2.  While the applicant's desire to use Department of Veterans Affairs' benefits is understandable, the Board does not change a properly-constituted record for the sole purpose of establishing entitlement to benefits from another agency.

3.  The applicant accepted NJP on four occasions and had written 22 to 25 bad checks to both military and civilian outlets totaling approximately $1,200.00 to $1,500.00.  Such misconduct certainly warranted a UOTHC discharge.

4.  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.



      _____________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)                                         AR20090021688



3


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20090021688



2


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

Similar Decisions

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080014369

    Original file (20080014369.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    This form further shows the applicant's character of service as bad conduct discharge and that he completed 3 years, 6 months, and 21 days of creditable military service. There is no indication in the applicant's records that he petitioned the Army Discharge Review Board for an upgrade of his discharge within that Board's 15-year statute of limitations. Conviction and discharge were effected in accordance with applicable laws and regulation, and the discharge appropriately characterized...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2005 | 20050004334C070206

    Original file (20050004334C070206.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant’s military records are incomplete; however, the available records show that he enlisted in the Regular Army on 24 August 1979. 3. Review of the applicant’s record of service shows that he had various incidents of misconduct, 3 nonjudicial punishments, 1 court-martial and 128 days of lost time due to AWOL and confinement. Records indicate that the applicant was 19 years old at the time his discharge.

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100011641

    Original file (20100011641.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE: 1. In his statement the applicant said that he didn't believe he should be given a discharge for misconduct because he did nothing bad. When discharge is ordered under this authority, a UOTHC discharge is considered appropriate.

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100010652

    Original file (20100010652.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant requests that his under other than honorable conditions (UOTHC) discharge be upgraded to a general discharge. When a discharge is ordered under this authority, a UOTHC discharge is considered appropriate. The ABCMR does not correct a properly-constituted military record to establish benefits from other agencies.

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2003 | 2003086426C070212

    Original file (2003086426C070212.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    In accordance with Army Regulation 15-185, the application and the available military records pertinent to the corrective action requested were reviewed to determine whether the application was filed within the time established by statute, and if not, whether it would be in the interest of justice to waive the failure to timely file. The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein. The applicant has not presented and...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002070001C070402

    Original file (2002070001C070402.rtf) Auto-classification: Approved

    The applicant’s military records show that on 17 May 1978, he entered the Regular Army for 3 years and that he continuously served on active duty for 3 years and 2 days, until being honorably separated for the purpose of immediate reenlistment on 18 May 1981. On 2 January 1985, the separation authority approved the separation action and directed that the applicant receive an UOTHC discharge for a pattern of misconduct and the commission of a serious offense under the provisions of...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2012 | 20120007330

    Original file (20120007330.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 4 March 1983, his command initiated separation action for a pattern misconduct under Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations – Enlisted Separation), chapter 14. The discharge authority approved the separation, granted the waiver of rehabilitative transfer, directed he be reduced to the lowest enlisted grade, and discharged with a UOTHC. The applicant was discharged UOTHC on 30 March 1983.

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | 20110006810

    Original file (20110006810.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 25 August 1981, the separation/convening authority approved the findings and recommendations of the administrative separation board and ordered the applicant's discharged under the provisions of chapter 14 of Army Regulation 635-200 by reason of misconduct and directed he be furnished an Under Other Than Honorable Conditions Discharge Certificate. Army Regulation 635-200, in effect at the time, set forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel. Army Regulation...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140019943

    Original file (20140019943.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    However, his DD Form 214 shows he was discharged on 4 September 1981 in the rank of private (PV1)/E-1 under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations – Enlisted Personnel), paragraph 14-33b, by reason of misconduct for frequent incidents of a discreditable nature with civil or military authorities with an under other than honorable conditions characterization of service. There is no evidence the applicant applied to the Army Discharge Review Board for an upgrade of...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140018712

    Original file (20140018712.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    He was 20 years and 6 months of age at the time. d. The applicant was 18 years of age at the time of his first enlistment and 20 years of age at the time of his reenlistment. He was 21 years of age when he was convicted by a court-martial the first time and 23 years of age when he was convicted by a court-martial the second time.