Search Decisions

Decision Text

ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100028432
Original file (20100028432.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

		IN THE CASE OF:	  

		BOARD DATE:	  26 May 2011

		DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20100028432 


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 under other than honorable conditions discharge.

2.  The applicant states that he was told that his discharge could be upgraded after 2 years but he forgot and now desires to have it upgraded.

3.  The applicant provides no additional documents with 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 enlisted in the Regular Army in Baltimore, MD on 28 February 1980 for a period of 3 years and training as an M-60A1/A3 armor crewman.  He was transferred to Fort Knox, KY to undergo his one-station unit training (OSUT). 

3.  On 5 December 1980 nonjudicial punishment (NJP) under the provisions of Article 15, Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) was imposed against the applicant for failing to go at the time prescribed to his appointed place of duty.

4.  On 12 January 1981 NJP under Article 15, UCMJ was imposed against him for failing to go at the time prescribed to his appointed place of duty.

5.  On 15 June 1981 court-martial charges were preferred against the applicant for:

* being disrespectful in language towards a superior commissioned officer
* disobeying a lawful command from a superior commissioned officer
* disobeying a lawful order from a superior noncommissioned officer (NCO) (two specifications)
* being disrespectful in language towards a superior NCO

6.  On 22 June 1981, after consulting with defense counsel, the applicant submitted a request for 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 by court-martial.  In his request he indicated he was making the request of his own free will without coercion from anyone and that he was aware of the implications attached to his request.  He also admitted he was guilty of the charges against him or of lesser included offense(s) which authorized the imposition of a bad conduct or dishonorable discharge.  He acknowledged he understood he could receive a discharge under other than honorable conditions and he might be deprived of all benefits as a result of such a discharge.  He further declined to submit a statement or explanation in his own behalf.

7.  On 14 July 1981, the appropriate authority (a major general) approved his request for discharge under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200,
chapter 10 and directed the issuance of an under other than honorable conditions discharge.

8.  Accordingly, on 20 July 1981 he was discharged for the good of the service - in lieu of trial by court-martial with an under other than honorable conditions discharge.  He completed 1 year, 4 months, and 23 days of creditable active service.

9.  There is no indication in the available records to show he ever applied to the Army Discharge Review Board (ADRB) for an upgrade of his discharge within that board's 15-year statute of limitations.

10.  Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel.  Chapter 10 provides 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 at any time after charges have been preferred.  A condition of submitting such a request is that the individual concerned must admit guilt to the charges against him or her or of a lesser included offense which authorizes the imposition of a bad conduct or dishonorable discharge and he or she must indicate he or she has been briefed and understands the consequences of such a request as well as the discharge he or she might receive.  A discharge under other than honorable conditions is normally considered appropriate.

11.  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 voluntary request for separation under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 10, for the good of the service to avoid trial by court-martial was administratively correct and in conformance with applicable regulations.  Accordingly, the type of discharge directed and the reasons were appropriate under the circumstances.

2.  After being afforded the opportunity to assert his innocence before a trial by court-martial, he voluntarily requested a discharge for the good of the service in hopes of avoiding a punitive discharge and having a felony conviction on his record.  In doing so he admitted guilt to the charges against him.

3.  The applicant's contentions have been noted and they are not sufficiently mitigating to warrant relief under the circumstances, especially given his repeated acts of misconduct, his undistinguished record of service, and the absence of mitigating circumstances at the time.  His service simply did not rise to the level of under honorable conditions.

4.  The Army does not have nor has it ever had a policy that provides for the automatic upgrade of a discharge based on the passage of time.  A discharge may be upgraded by the ADRB or this Board if either determines the discharge was improper or inequitable.  A review of this case reveals no evidence that suggests there was any error or injustice related to the applicant's separation processing.  Therefore, it is concluded his discharge was proper and equitable and it accurately reflects the applicant's overall record of service.  As a result, there is an insufficient evidentiary basis to support granting the requested relief in this case.

5.  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 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)                                         AR20100028432



3


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20100028432



2


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

Similar Decisions

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2003 | 2003086532C070212

    Original file (2003086532C070212.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein. The Board considered the following evidence: A condition of submitting such a request is that the individual concerned must admit guilt to the charges against them or of a lesser included offense which authorizes the imposition of a bad conduct or dishonorable discharge and they must indicate that they have been briefed and understand the consequences of such a request as...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2012 | 20120002876

    Original file (20120002876.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE: 1. The applicant requests, in effect, upgrade of his under other than honorable conditions discharge. On 6 August 1981, the appropriate authority approved his request for discharge and directed his discharge under other than honorable conditions.

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002070796C070402

    Original file (2002070796C070402.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein. APPLICANT REQUESTS: That his discharge under other than honorable conditions be upgraded to honorable. EVIDENCE OF RECORD : The applicant's military records show:

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2012 | 20120010257

    Original file (20120010257.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant states he did not know he could request an upgrade of his discharge. Chapter 10 provides 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. Discharges under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 10, are voluntary requests for discharge in lieu of trial by court-martial.

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2012 | 20120006967

    Original file (20120006967.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant's military records show he enlisted in the Regular Army in pay grade E-1 on 5 March 1980 for 4 years. On 8 January 1982, the separation authority approved the applicant's request for discharge for the good of the service and directed the issuance of a discharge UOTHC and reduction to pay grade E-1. __________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.

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140007621

    Original file (20140007621 .txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant requests that his discharge under other than honorable conditions be upgraded to a general discharge. On 25 January 1983, the appropriate authority (a major general) approved his request for discharge and directed the applicant be given an under other than honorable conditions discharge. Chapter 10 provides 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...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002078436C070215

    Original file (2002078436C070215.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein. APPLICANT REQUESTS: That his discharge under other than honorable conditions be upgraded to a general discharge. Accordingly, he was discharged under other than honorable conditions on 1 October 1982, under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 10, in lieu of trial by court-martial.

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090001350

    Original file (20090001350.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant states that she was almost getting out of the Army on an honorable discharge before she was charged with disobeying a staff sergeant in the laundry. Accordingly, she was discharged under other than honorable conditions on 21 July 1982 under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 10, in lieu of trial by court-martial. A condition of submitting such a request is that the individual concerned must admit guilt to the charges against him or her or of a lesser included...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100023300

    Original file (20100023300.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant requests that his discharge under other than honorable conditions be upgraded to an honorable or a general discharge. The appropriate authority (a major general) approved his request for discharge on 25 March 1983 and directed that he be discharged under other than honorable conditions. There is no evidence in the available records to show he applied to the Army Discharge Review Board for an upgrade of his discharge within that board's 15-year statute of limitations.

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2012 | 20120020421

    Original file (20120020421.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    There is no evidence indicating he applied to the Army Discharge Review Board for an upgrade of his discharge. His record of indiscipline includes nonjudicial punishment for possession of marijuana, AWOL, and several court-martial charges for offenses that include disobeying lawful orders and disrespect toward his superior noncommissioned officer. Based on his record of indiscipline, his overall record of service did not support the issuance of a general discharge by the separation...