BOARD DATE: 6 October 2011
DOCKET NUMBER: AR20110008144
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 that his discharge under other than honorable conditions be upgraded to a fully honorable discharge.
2. The applicant states that he faithfully served his country when asked as an 18 year old kid who was ignorant of his choices; however, his actions did not warrant the discharge he received and all of his commanders can attest to his commitment and dedication to service.
3. The applicant provides no supporting 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 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 applicant was born on 13 March 1962 and enlisted in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania on 19 June 1980 for a period of 3 years, training as an air defense artillery short range missile crewman, and assignment to Europe. He completed his one-station unit training (OSUT) at Fort Bliss, Texas and was transferred to Germany on 19 October 1980.
3. On 19 October 1981 nonjudicial punishment (NJP) was imposed against him for sleeping on guard duty.
4. On 16 February 1982 NJP was imposed against him for being absent without leave (AWOL) from 29 December 1981 to 8 January 1982.
5. The applicant departed Germany on 15 April 1982 for assignment to Fort Carson, Colorado.
6. On 1 July 1982 NJP was imposed against him for being AWOL from 19 June to 26 June 1982.
7. On 13 September 1982 NJP was imposed against him for failure to go to his place of duty and for being AWOL from 25 August to 26 August 1982.
8. On 13 October 1982 NJP was imposed against him for being AWOL from 8 October to 13 October 1982.
9. On 2 December 1982 the applicants commander notified him that he was initiating action to discharge him from the service under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 14, for misconduct pattern of misconduct based on his disciplinary record.
10. On 3 December 1982, after consulting with counsel, the applicant waived all of his rights and declined to submit a statement in his own behalf.
11. On 14 December 1982, the appropriate authority (a major general) approved the recommendation for discharge and directed that the applicant be discharged under other than honorable conditions.
12. On 22 December 1982 NJP was imposed against him for being AWOL from 9 November to 29 November 1982.
13. Accordingly, he was discharged under other than honorable conditions on
23 December 1982, under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 14-12b, due to misconduct pattern of misconduct. He had served 2 years,
4 months, and 9 days of active service and he had approximately 25 days of lost time due to AWOL.
14. There is no evidence in the available records to show that he ever applied to the Army Discharge Review Board for an upgrade of his discharge within that boards 15-year statute of limitations.
15. Army Regulation 635-200, sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel. Chapter 14 establishes policy and procedures for separating personnel for misconduct. Specific categories included minor infractions, a pattern of misconduct, involvement in frequent incidents of a discreditable nature with civil and military authorities, and commission of a serious offense, which includes drug offenses. Although an honorable or general discharge is authorized, a discharge under other than honorable conditions is normally considered appropriate.
16. Paragraph 3-7a of Army Regulation 635-200 (Enlisted Personnel) 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.
17. Paragraph 3-7b also 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 Soldiers separation specifically allows such characterization.
DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:
1. The applicant's administrative separation was accomplished in compliance with applicable regulations with no indication of procedural errors which would tend to jeopardize his rights.
2. Accordingly, the characterization and the narrative reason for separation were appropriate for the circumstances of his case.
3. The applicants contentions have been noted; however, they are not sufficiently mitigating when compared to the repeated nature of his offenses. The applicants overall service simply does not rise to the level of discharge under honorable conditions.
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) AR20110008144
3
ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
1
ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20110008144
2
ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
1
ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | 20110012005
On 10 November 1982, the applicant was transferred to the U.S. Army Correctional Activity (USACA) at Fort Riley, KS to serve his sentence to confinement. On 22 December 1982, the appropriate authority approved the recommendation for discharge under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 14, paragraph 14-12b for a pattern of misconduct, with an under other than honorable conditions discharge. There is no evidence the applicant ever applied to the Army Discharge Review Board for...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100029871
There is no evidence in the available records to show the applicant ever applied to the Army Discharge Review Board for an upgrade of his discharge within that board's 15-year statute of limitations. Paragraph 3-7b of Army Regulation 635-200 also provides that a general discharge is a separation from the Army under honorable conditions. Therefore, the Board determined the overall merits of this case are insufficient as a basis for correction of the records of the individual concerned.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | 20110011794
Accordingly, he was discharged under honorable conditions on 17 January 1983 under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 13 for unsatisfactory performance. The applicant has failed to show through the evidence of record and the evidence submitted with his application that he was unable to perform the duties of his military occupational specialty due to physical disability at the time of his discharge 25+ years ago. Therefore, the Board determined that the overall merits of...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140004774
THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE: 1. On 1 March 1982, the applicant submitted a request for discharge in lieu of trial by court-martial under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 10. On 23 March 1982, the appropriate authority (a brigadier general) approved his request for discharge and directed the issuance of an under other than honorable conditions discharge certificate.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2013 | 20130021869
On 27 May 1982, NJP was imposed against him for being AWOL from 2 - 6 May 1982. There is no evidence in the available records 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. Therefore, in the absence of evidence showing an error or injustice occurred in his case, there appears to be no basis for granting an honorable or a general discharge.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2012 | 20120006090
The applicant applied to the Army Discharge Review Board (ADRB) for an upgrade of his discharge on 23 July 1981 and requested a personal appearance before that board. 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 | BCMR | CY2013 | 20130015516
Application for correction of military records (with supporting documents provided, if any). There is no evidence in the available records to show that he applied to the Army Discharge Review Board for an upgrade of his discharge within that boards 15-year statute of limitations. Paragraph 3-7b provides that a general discharge is a separation from the Army under honorable conditions.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100026221
The applicant requests his discharge under other than honorable conditions be upgraded. There is no evidence the applicant applied to the Army Discharge Review Board for upgrade of his discharge within its 15-year statute of limitations. _______ _ 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 | CY2010 | 20100013310
THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE: 1. The applicant requests that his discharge under other than honorable conditions be upgraded to a general discharge. On 19 July 1982, he went AWOL and remained absent in desertion until he surrendered to military authorities at Fort Gordon, Georgia, on 30 November 1982 and was transferred to Fort Bragg where charges were preferred against him on 7 December 1982 for the AWOL offense.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090008604
The applicant states that it is his understanding that his discharge under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations Enlisted Personnel), chapter 10 (Discharge for the Good of the Service), will be upgraded to a general, under honorable conditions discharge after 6 months from the time of discharge. There is also no evidence in the available record, nor has the applicant submitted any evidence to show, that he was told that his discharge would be upgraded 6 months...