IN THE CASE OF:	

		BOARD DATE:	 10 November 2011 

		DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20110010822 


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 an upgrade of her general discharge to honorable.

2.  She states she was very young while in the military with a spouse who was very abusive, to include writing checks against her account.  She didn't know how to fix it then, but she did fix it.  She also states she is a veteran who loves her country and would like to obtain a career with the Department of Veterans Affairs.

3.  She provides no additional evidence.

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 on 2 December 1987 at 18 years of age.
3.  The DD Form 1966 (Record of Military Processing - Armed Forces of the United States) completed during her enlistment processing shows she was unmarried and a single parent at the time.

4.  Her record shows she was counseled:

	a.  on 13 September 1990, for indebtedness and checks returned due to insufficient funds and warned that further violations would result in action under the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ);

	b.  on 17 December 1990, for her continued indebtedness and warned if she continued to have financial problems she could be "dishonorably chaptered out of the Army"; and

	c.  on 8 January 1991, for a letter of indebtedness, dated 4 January 1991, and informed she would be barred from reenlistment, she would report to Army Community Service (ACS) and enroll in financial counseling, and if her unit received another letter of indebtedness, she would be eliminated from the Army.

5.  A DD Form 1172 (Application for Uniformed Service Identification Card – Defense Enrollment Eligibility Reporting System Enrollment) shows she married K____ E. C____ on 13 March 1991.

6.  Her record shows she was counseled again on 28 March 1991, for three letters of indebtedness and informed by her first sergeant (1SG) that he was recommending nonjudicial punishment (NJP) under the provisions of Article 15, UCMJ, for failure to pay just debts and her discharge for misconduct under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations – Enlisted Personnel), chapter 14.

7.  A memorandum for record from the Director, ACS, Fort Hood, TX, dated 27 March 1991, as requested by her 1SG, summarizes her contact with ACS.

	a.  On 18 September 1990, a budget evaluation showed her net income was not sufficient to cover living expenses or pay any other creditor liabilities.  She was given several recommendations for improving her financial situation.

	b.  On 19 October 1990, she missed a scheduled appointment.

	c.  On 8 January 1991, she was referred to ACS by Army Emergency Relief.  Another budget evaluation found her net income was sufficient to cover living expenses, but was not sufficient to cover any other creditor liabilities.  She was again given several recommendations for improving her financial situation.

	d.  On 7 February 1991, she missed a scheduled appointment.

8.  A DA Form 2627 (Record of Proceedings under Article 15, UCMJ) shows she received NJP on 16 May 1991 for dishonorably failing to pay two debts.

9.  On 28 August 1991, she acknowledged receipt of her commander's recommendation to bar her from further reenlistment.  On 7 September 1991, she submitted a statement in her own behalf.  In her statement, she did not mention her spouse.  On 13 September 1991, the bar to reenlistment was approved and she indicated she would not appeal on 17 September 1991.

10.  On 21 October 1991, she acknowledged receipt of notification of her commander's recommendation to separate her for a pattern of misconduct under the provisions Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 14-12b, and his recommendation that she receive a general discharge under honorable conditions.  On 22 October 1991, she acknowledged she had been advised by counsel of the basis for the contemplated action to separate her and its effects.  She elected not to submit statements in her own behalf.

11.  On 31 October 1991, the separation authority approved her separation and directed issuance of a General Discharge Certificate.  On 4 November 1991, she was discharged accordingly.  Her DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) shows she completed 3 years, 11 months, and 3 days of active military service.

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

	a.  Chapter 14 establishes policy and prescribes procedures for separating members for misconduct.  Specific categories include minor disciplinary infractions (a pattern of misconduct consisting solely of minor military disciplinary infractions), a pattern of misconduct (consisting of discreditable involvement with civil or military authorities or conduct prejudicial to good order and discipline), commission of a serious offense, and convictions by civil authorities.  Action will be taken to separate a member for misconduct when it is clearly established that rehabilitation is impracticable or is unlikely to succeed.  A discharge under other than honorable conditions is normally appropriate for a Soldier discharged under this chapter.  However, the separation authority may direct a general discharge if such is merited by the Soldier's overall record.  Only a general court-martial convening authority may approve an honorable discharge or delegate approval authority for an honorable discharge under this provision of the regulation.

	b.  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 or is otherwise so meritorious that any other characterization would be clearly inappropriate.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The available evidence shows the applicant was given ample warning that her financial problems could result in her separation and received counseling on ways to improve her financial situation, yet she failed to resolve those problems.  As a result, she was properly recommended for separation.  All requirements of law and regulation were met and her rights were fully protected throughout the separation process.

2.  The record does not show and she has not provided evidence showing her spouse contributed to her indebtedness.  In fact, the record shows her indebtedness began before she married on 13 March 1991.

3.  She was counseled on four occasions for indebtedness and accepted NJP for failure to pay debts.  Based on this record of indiscipline, her service clearly did not meet the standards of acceptable conduct and performance of duty for Army personnel.  Therefore, she is not entitled to an 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 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)                                         AR20110010822



3


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20110010822



2


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1