IN THE CASE OF:
BOARD DATE: 1 November 2011
DOCKET NUMBER: AR20110003832
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 her Bad Conduct Discharge (BCD) be upgraded to a General Discharge.
2. The applicant states although she was a very good Soldier, she succumbed to her alcoholism and drug addiction. Her situation was compounded because her superiors believed she was distributing illegal drugs as well as using them.
3. While she continued her alcoholic behavior after she was released from incarceration, she has turned over a new leaf by enrolling in a long-term recovery facility and is working diligently to get back on track. She believes this upgrade will help in her effort to live a sober and productive life.
4. 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 she enlisted in the Regular Army on 28 November 1989 and was awarded the military occupational specialty of medical specialist.
3. On 18 December 1990, in accordance with her pleas, a General Court-Martial found the applicant guilty of:
* distribution of heroin on 7, 15, and 26 September 1990
* distribution of marijuana
* wrongful use of marijuana
* wrongful use of heroin on 15 and 26 September 1990
* violation of a lawful order or general regulation by possessing drug abuse paraphernalia (two specifications)
4. Her sentence consisted of a BCD, confinement for 4 years, forfeiture of $474 pay per month for 48 months, and a reduction to pay grade E-1.
5. The appropriate authority approved the sentence and, with the exception of the BCD, ordered it to be executed.
6. On 24 September 1991, the United States Army Court of Military Review ordered administrative corrections in the record of trial, and then affirmed the findings and sentence.
7. On 11 December 1991, the United States Court of Military Appeals denied the applicant's petition for grant of review.
8. On 11 February 1992, the applicant's BCD was ordered to be executed.
9. Accordingly, on 6 March 1992, she was discharged with a BCD.
10. Army Regulation 635-200 (Enlisted Separations) 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.
11. Army Regulation 635-200, 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 members service generally has met the standards of acceptable conduct and performance of duty for Army personnel, or is otherwise so meritorious that any other characterization would be clearly inappropriate.
DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:
1. While the applicant argues that she did not distribute illegal drugs, she pled guilty to and was convicted of several specifications of this charge. She has not submitted any evidence to refute the appropriateness of the verdict.
2. In addition, her case was given full consideration by the United States Army Court of Military Review. The time to challenge the charges would have been during her trial or during her appellate review.
3. While it is commendable that the applicant has decided to quit illegal drugs and alcohol 19 years after her discharge and turn her life around, unfortunately, this is insufficient to warrant upgrading 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) AR20110003832
3
ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
1
ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20110003832
2
ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
1
ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | 20110021339
IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 8 May 2012 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20110021339 THE BOARD CONSIDERED THE FOLLOWING EVIDENCE: 1. In approving the adjudged sentence, the convening authority ordered that "except for the part of the sentence extending to the BCD will be executed." The applicant contends that her BCD should be upgraded to an honorable discharge because her discharge is unjust.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080002626
On 11 September 1985, the applicants immediate commander notified the applicant of his intent to initiate separation action against her in accordance with paragraph 14-12(b) of Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations), for misconduct, abuse of illegal drugs, and for establishing a pattern of misconduct. The immediate commander further remarked that the applicant: a. demonstrated a pattern of misconduct, resulting in numerous counseling statements, letters of concern, letters of...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140017269
p. She should never have been charged with a crime. 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. There is no evidence showing she applied to the Army Discharge Review Board for an upgraded of her discharge.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140001713
A DA Form 4856-R, dated 11 September 1990, shows the applicant was driving or in physical control of a motor vehicle on 10 July 1990 while his blood alcohol content exceeded the legal limits. On 11 February 1991, the applicant's immediate commander initiated discharge action against him based on his commission of a serious offense. It further stated that ADAPCP services would continue to be provided until the client was separated and that enlisted Soldiers identified as illegally abusing...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100030236
The applicant requests, in effect, an upgrade of his bad conduct discharge (BCD). The convening authority approved the sentence and the U.S. Army Court of Military Review affirmed the findings and sentence on 9 October 1990. His conviction and discharge were effected in accordance with applicable laws and regulations and his discharge appropriately characterizes the misconduct for which he was convicted.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090019965
On 8 August 1990, the convening authority approved the sentence and, except for the part of the sentence extending to a bad conduct discharge, ordered it executed. The conviction and discharge were effected in accordance with applicable law and regulations and the discharge appropriately characterized the misconduct for which she was convicted. As a result, there is insufficient basis to upgrade the applicant's discharge to either an honorable or a general discharge.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100025306
Finding: Not Guilty c. Charge III. Plea: Not Guilty Finding: Guilty, except for the words "son of a bitch" e. Charge V. Article 134. Conviction and discharge were effected in accordance with applicable law and regulations, and the discharge appropriately characterizes the misconduct for which the applicant was convicted.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2005 | 20050001684C070206
He contends an American Legion Service Officer pointed out to him that his bad conduct discharge had been upgraded to a discharge under other than honorable conditions. Army Regulation 635-200 provides the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel. There is no evidence to show the applicant's bad conduct discharge was upgraded to a discharge under other than honorable conditions.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2005 | 20050001684C070206
He contends an American Legion Service Officer pointed out to him that his bad conduct discharge had been upgraded to a discharge under other than honorable conditions. Army Regulation 635-200 provides the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel. There is no evidence to show the applicant's bad conduct discharge was upgraded to a discharge under other than honorable conditions.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140004563
Additionally, his record contains a DA Form 3975-1 (Commanders Report of Disciplinary Action) showing his commander verbally reprimanded him for this incident. His record contains a final U.S. Army Criminal Investigation Command (CID) report of investigation, dated 10 July 1990, which shows the applicant and another Soldier (Jxxxxxx) jointly smoked a cigarette, provided by the applicant, which contained marijuana. The board recommended the applicant be eliminated from military service and...