IN THE CASE OF:	  

		BOARD DATE:	    3 May 2011

		DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20100023494 


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 reconsideration of his earlier request for an upgrade of his under other than honorable conditions (UOTHC) discharge.  

2.  He states he:

* has paid for his past misconduct and is ready to move forward with his life
* is no longer the irresponsible person whose actions caused him to be separated from the military 
* has had time to think about the way he was raised, his beliefs, and values since his separation
* has begun to make amends with many of the people whose lives were affected by his recklessness 
* has a lot to offer society and would like the opportunity to reach someone else with the same experiences

3.  He did not provide any additional evidence.  

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  Incorporated herein by reference are military records which were summarized in the previous consideration of the applicant's case by the Army Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR) in Docket Number AR20100000440 on 29 June 2010.  

2.  The applicant has provided new arguments that will be considered by the Board.  

3.  He enlisted in the Regular Army on 6 September 1989.  

4.  On an unknown date in September 1993, court-martial charges were preferred against the applicant for wrongfully taking mail and obtaining services under false pretenses.  His discharge packet indicates he also received nonjudicial punishment under the provisions of Article 15, Uniform Code of Military Justice; however, the Article 15 proceedings are not available.  Also, he was found guilty of a criminal offense in civilian court of carrying a concealed weapon (September 1993) and disorderly conduct and public intoxication (February 1994).  

5.  On 3 May 1994, he consulted with legal counsel and voluntarily requested discharge for the good of the service under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations), chapter 10.  In doing so, he admitted guilt to the offense charged and acknowledged that he might encounter substantial prejudice in civilian life and that he might be ineligible for many or all Army benefits administered by the Veterans Administration if a UOTHC discharge was issued.  He also submitted a statement on his own behalf wherein he accepted responsibility for his actions and asked for leniency.

6.  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 and directed that he be reduced to private/E-1 and issued an UOTHC discharge.  

7.  On 8 July 1994, he was discharged under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 10, for the good of the service with a UOTHC Discharge Certificate.  He completed a total of 4 years, 10 months, and 3 days of creditable active service.  

8.  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.

9.  Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel.  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.

10.  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 contentions in regard to his post-service conduct are acknowledged.  However, these issues are not sufficiently mitigating to warrant relief in this case.

2.  His voluntary request for separation under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 10, in lieu of trial by court-martial was administratively correct and in conformance with applicable regulations.

3.  His service record shows he received one Article 15 and was charged with wrongfully taking mail and obtaining services under false pretenses.  As a result, his record of service was not satisfactory and did not meet the standards for either an honorable or general discharge as defined in Army Regulation 635-200.  His discharge appropriately characterized his service.

4.  He has not presented sufficient evidence to show his discharge under Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 10 was in error or unjust or that his discharge should be changed to either a general or honorable 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 to amend the decision of the ABCMR set forth in Docket Number AR20100000440, dated 29 June 2010.




      _______ _   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)                                         AR20100023494





3


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20100023494



4


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1