Search Decisions

Decision Text

ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100014629
Original file (20100014629.txt) Auto-classification: Denied


		IN THE CASE OF:	  

		BOARD DATE:	  9 December 2010

		DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20100014629 


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 upgrade of his general discharge to an honorable discharge and restoration of his rank/grade to sergeant (SGT)/E-5.

2.  The applicant states that he would like to upgrade his rank/pay grade to the highest rank/grade he achieved while on active duty.

3.  The applicant provides 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 military records show that he enlisted in the Regular Army on 18 February 1987.  He was awarded military occupational specialty 92A (automated logistical specialist), and was promoted to SGT/E-5 on 1 April 1990.

3.  On 3 September 1991, the applicant submitted a memorandum to his battalion commander, Subject:  Letter of Consideration for Article 15, UCMJ [Uniform Code of Military Justice].in response to nonjudicial punishment (NJP) he was receiving for driving while intoxicated on 12 August 1991.  The punishment imposed on the applicant was reduction from SGT/E-5 to specialist (SPC)/E-4.  The applicant also had his motor vehicle operator's license revoked.

4.  On 27 March 1992, the applicant's commander was notified that the applicant had a positive urinalysis for cocaine.

5.  On 16 December 1993, the applicant again accepted NJP under Article 15, UCMJ, for driving while drunk.  His punishment included a reduction from SPC/
E-4 to private (PV1)/E-1.

6.  On 9 February 1994, the applicant was arrested for shoplifting approximately $83.00 worth of merchandise from the Fort Sam Houston Main Exchange.  At the time of his arrest, the applicant stated several times that he did not know why he did it, but that he was sorry.  The applicant waived his rights and admitted to taking the items.

7.  On 11 February 1994, court-martial charges were preferred against the applicant for stealing merchandise of a value of about $83.00, the property of the Army and Air Force Exchange Service.

8.  On 24 February 1994, the applicant requested discharge under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations - Enlisted Personnel, chapter 10, for the good of the service - in lieu of trial court-martial.

9.  The applicant's request was approved by the appropriate authority.  Accordingly, on 22 March 1994 the applicant was discharged with an under other than honorable conditions discharge in the rank/grade of PV1/E-1.

10.  On 20 March 1998, the Army Discharge Review Board (ADRB) upgraded the applicant's discharge to a general discharge.  However, the ADRB determined the reason and authority for his discharge was both proper and equitable and voted not to change them.

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, 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.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant was twice arrested for driving while intoxicated/drunk; he tested positive for cocaine in a urinalysis; and he admitted to shoplifting from the Army and Air Force Exchange Service.  Such a pattern of misconduct certainly warranted an under other than honorable conditions discharge.

2.  While the ADRB directed upgrade of the applicant's discharge to a general discharge, there is no basis for further upgrading his discharge.

3.  The applicant was reduced in rank and grade twice as a result of his acceptance of NJP.  He has not submitted any documentation or argument which would warrant restoring his rank/grade.

4.  In view of the foregoing, there is no basis for granting the applicant’s requested relief.

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)                                         AR20100014629



3


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20100014629



4


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

Similar Decisions

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090001617

    Original file (20090001617.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The unit commander notified the applicant that action was being initiated to separate him under the provisions of Chapter 9, Army Regulation 635-200 with a GD, based on him being declared an ADAPCP rehabilitation failure. The separation authority approved the applicant's separation action under provisions of Chapter 9, Army Regulation 635-200, by reason of alcohol rehabilitative failure and directed the applicant receive a GD. The DD Form 214 issued to the applicant at that time shows he...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100028919

    Original file (20100028919.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 21 June 2011 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20100028919 THE BOARD CONSIDERED THE FOLLOWING EVIDENCE: 1. The applicant's records contains a record of nonjudicial punishment (NJP), under Article 15, Uniform Code of Military Justice, dated 3 November 2000, for conspiring to steal and stealing property valued at $250.00 from the Fort Sill Army and Air Force Exchange Service (AAFES) Shoppette for which he received a reduction to specialist (SPC)/E-4 and a forfeiture of $796 pay for...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100014545

    Original file (20100014545.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    On or about 13 December 1993, the applicant's commander informed him she was initiating action to separate him for a pattern of misconduct under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations - Enlisted Personnel), chapter 14-12b. The evidence of record does not support the applicant's request for an upgrade of his discharge to an HD. __________X______________ CHAIRPERSON I certify that herein is recorded the true and complete record of the proceedings of the Army Board...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | 20110014833

    Original file (20110014833.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant requests his general discharge under honorable conditions from the Regular Army be upgraded to an honorable discharge. He was counseled on the effects a general discharge and an under other than honorable conditions discharge could have on his benefits and that they could severely prejudice him in civilian life. He also submitted statements from a specialist and two sergeants/pay grade E-5 in support of him receiving an honorable discharge.

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090012459

    Original file (20090012459.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Application for correction of military records (with supporting documents provided, if any). On 1 April 1993, the unit commander notified the applicant that he was initiating action to separate him under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations - Enlisted Personnel), paragraph 14-12b and 12c, by reason of patterns of misconduct and commission of a serious offense. The DD Form 214 the applicant was issued upon his discharge on 28 May 1993 shows he was separated under...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2012 | 20120022385

    Original file (20120022385.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    c. He was accused of being absent without authority and not at his prescribed place of duty. The applicant provides: * DD Form 458 (front page only) * POV Inspection Checklist * DA Form 3975 (Military Police Report) * DA Form 3822-R (Report of Mental Status Evaluation) CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE: 1. Charges are recorded on the DD Form 458.

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080001404

    Original file (20080001404.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE: 1. On 20 October 1994, the separation authority approved the applicant's discharge in lieu of trial by court-martial, and directed that he receive an UOTHC discharge, and that he be reduced to PV1 prior to the execution of his discharge. The restoration of the applicant's grade that resulted from the ADRB upgrade action was accomplished as a matter of equity and does not call into question the propriety of the original UOTHC discharge, or...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140010136

    Original file (20140010136.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    He went above and beyond, not only for the Army or himself, but for the Army's future NCOs, his Soldiers. An Enlisted Record Brief, dated 13 November 2012, that shows the applicant's rank/grade was reduced from SGT/E-5 to specialist (SPC)/E-4 on 15 February 2012. The applicant provides a self-authored statement to the Army Grade Determination Review Board (AGDRB), dated 26 March 2014, in which he states: a.

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100020863

    Original file (20100020863.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant states, in effect, he served a good 3-year enlistment, followed by a good 4-year enlistment without a single problem. On 20 October 1993 [sic], the applicant's commander notified the applicant of his intent to discharge him under the provision of Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations - Enlisted Personnel), chapter 14, for misconduct - commission of a serious offense. ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20100020863 3 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY...

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2013 | AR20130012676

    Original file (AR20130012676.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The evidence contained in the applicant’s service record shows that on 22 July 1998, the unit commander notified the applicant of initiation of separation action under the provisions of Chapter 14, paragraph 14-12c, AR 635-200, by reason of misconduct—commission of a serious offense, for wrongfully using cocaine, an illegal drug. Army policy states that an under other than honorable conditions discharge is normally considered appropriate; however, a general, under honorable conditions or an...