BOARD DATE: 23 September 2010
DOCKET NUMBER: AR20100007953
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 his Under Other Than Honorable Conditions (UOTHC) discharge be upgraded to an honorable discharge.
2. The applicant states he had 9 years of exemplary service and he does not believe 3 months of bad behavior should ruin him the rest of his life.
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 applicants 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 applicants failure to timely file. In all other respects, there are insufficient bases to waive the statute of limitations for timely filing.
2. The applicants military records show that he enlisted in the Regular Army on 19 July 1983. He completed the training requirements and he was awarded military occupational specialty (MOS) 76P (Materiel Control and Accounting Specialist) and sergeant/pay grade E-5 was the highest rank that he achieved.
3. On 24 September 1992, the applicant accepted nonjudicial punishment (NJP) under Article 15, Uniform Code of Military Justice, for going from his appointed place of duty without authority, failing to go at the time prescribed to his appointed place of duty, and dereliction in the performance of his duties in that he failed to supervise and assist in the detail of taking down camouflage nets.
4. On 22 January 1993, the applicant accepted NJP for unlawfully entering the barracks room of a female Soldier and being disorderly by rubbing the left leg of the female Soldier without her consent; unlawfully entering the barracks room of second female Soldier and causing a breach of peace by wrongfully shouting "All company C females are Ho's, there is one of those little white Ho's right there" and "All white women are a bunch of whores" or words to that effect; and unlawfully enter the barracks room of a third female Soldier and being disorderly by making innuendos of a sexual nature to a female.
5. The applicant's discharge packet is not contained in the available military records. However, his DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) shows that on 26 March 1993, he was discharged under the provisions of chapter 14, Army Regulation 635-200, due to misconduct, commission of a serious offense with an UOTHC discharge. He had completed 9 years, 8 months, and 8 days of active service.
6. Army Regulation 635-200 (Enlisted Separations) sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel. Paragraph 14-12c applies to the separation of individuals who committed a serious military or civil offense, if the specific circumstance of the offense warrant separation and a punitive discharge would be authorized for the same or a closely related offense under the manual for courts-martial.
DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:
1. While the reason for the applicant's discharge is not a matter of record, he accepted NJP on two occasions for a number of serious offenses.
2. As such, regularity must be presumed that what the Army did was correct.
3. The applicant has not submitted any evidence or argument which would warrant changing a properly issued 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) AR20100007953
3
ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
1
ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20100007953
ARMY | BCMR | CY2003 | 2003086191C070212
However, he evidently requested discharge in lieu of trial by court-martial for the good of the service, and that request was accepted. As for the applicant’s earlier periods of active service, he accepted NJP twice during each enlistment. The applicant’s post service conduct has been carefully considered by the Board.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2001 | 2001060741C070421
The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein. On 28 October 1999, a second investigation was conducted by the Military Criminal Investigation Command (CID), Fort Drum, New York, for allegations of committing sodomy by force of another soldier and unlawfully breaking and entering the barracks room of said soldier with the intent to commit sodomy. Chapter 10 of that regulation provides, in pertinent part, that a member...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090016286
On 9 December 1985, the separation authority directed that the applicant be reduced to the lowest enlisted rank and separated under the provisions of chapter 14, Army Regulation 635-200 with a UOTHC discharge. The DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) issued to the applicant upon his discharge shows he was discharged under the provisions of paragraph 14-12c, Army Regulation 635-200, by reason of commission of a serious offense, and received a UOTHC discharge. A...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2012 | 20120002229
On 10 August 1993, the applicant's unit commander notified the applicant of his intent to recommend discharge under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations Enlisted Personnel), paragraph 14-12c, for misconduct commission of a serious offense. On 20 September 1993, the separation authority approved the separation action and directed the applicant be discharged from the service under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 14-12c, by reason of...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2013 | 20130006267
There is no indication he applied to the Army Discharge Review Board (ADRB) for an upgrade of his discharge within that board's 15-year statute of limitations. Army Regulation 635-200 provides the policies, standards, and procedures for the separation of enlisted personnel. Therefore, absent evidence of error or injustice in the discharge process, there is an insufficient evidentiary basis to support an upgrade of his discharge.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2003 | 2003091394C070212
The applicant states by listing Army Discharge Review Board issue numbers, that he was not a drug and alcohol rehabilitation failure, and that he would like his record of court-martial convictions, his record of convictions by civil authorities while he was in the Army, and his application for compassionate reassignment to be taken into consideration in determining whether his discharge should be upgraded. The board of officers found “That a clear pattern of continued misconduct has been...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140018347
On 9 September 1985, his immediate commander notified him of his intent to initiate separation action against him in accordance with paragraph 14-12b of Army Regulation 635-200 (Enlisted Personnel Separations) for misconduct pattern of misconduct. Consistent with the chain of command's recommendations and following a legal review for legal sufficiency, the separation authority approved the administrative discharge and ordered the applicant discharged under the provisions of paragraph...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090018670
On 30 March 1984, the unit commander notified the applicant of his intent to initiate separation action on him under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations - Enlisted Personnel), chapter 13, for unsatisfactory performance. The applicant states, in effect, that he should have received an honorable discharge. The DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) he was issued shows he was discharged on 9 May 1984 with a general discharge in...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090011644
There is no evidence to show that he ever applied to the Army Discharge Review Board for an upgrade of his discharge within that board's 15-year statute of limitations. 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.
ARMY | DRB | CY2013 | AR20130005141
THE APPLICANTS REQUEST AND STATEMENT: Issues: The applicant requests an upgrade of his discharge from under other than honorable conditions to general, under honorable conditions or honorable and a change to the narrative reason for separation. 12 June 2007, the separation authority directed the applicants discharge with a characterization of service of honorable. On 16 November 2007, the separation authority approved the Chapter 10 request and directed the discharge with a...