IN THE CASE OF:	  

		BOARD DATE:  23 February 2012

		DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20110018086 


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, in effect, an upgrade of her under other than honorable conditions (UOTHC) discharge to an honorable discharge.

2.  The applicant states, in effect, that in 1993 she received a UOTHC discharge and she was told that she could get it reversed in a year or two later. She further states that she would like to apologize for her actions; she was irresponsible and is no longer the same person.  The applicant states that in the past 18 years she has had many regrets and missed opportunities due to her actions and that she is not the person she was when she served in the military.  She has learned a hard lesson from her mistakes and she has taken action to correct them.  The applicant asks that her discharge be upgraded so that she can find better employment.

3.  The applicant provides a copy of:

* a completed DD Form 293 (Application for the Review of Discharge from the Armed Forces of the United States)
* a self-authored statement
* two character reference letters
* a copy of a Certificate of Achievement
* copies of four Certificates of Appreciation




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's record shows she enlisted in the Army Delayed Entry Program on 21 June 1989 and enlisted in the Regular Army on 1 August 1989 for a period of 4 years.  She was trained in, awarded, and served in military occupational specialty 77F (Petroleum Supply Specialist).  Records further show the highest rank/grade she attained was private (PVT)/E-2.

3.  On 24 February 1993, court-martial charges were preferred against the applicant for two specifications of writing numerous checks between February and November 1992 and failure to maintain sufficient funds for payment of such checks in full upon their presentment for payment.

4.  On 2 March 1993, the applicant submitted a request for discharge for the good of the service under the provisions Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations - Enlisted Personnel), chapter 10.  In her request for discharge the applicant indicated that she had not been coerced into requesting a discharge and she had been advised of the implications that were attached to the request.

5.  The applicant consulted with legal counsel and was advised of the basis for the contemplated trial by court-martial, the maximum permissible punishment authorized under the UCMJ, the possible effects of a UOTHC discharge, and of the procedures and rights that were available to her.  She further acknowledged that she understood that if her discharge request was approved, she could be deprived of many or all Army benefits, that she could be ineligible for many or all benefits administered by the Department of Veterans Affairs, and that she could be deprived of her rights and benefits as a veteran under both Federal and State laws.  The applicant elected not to submit a statement on he own behalf.



6.  On 10 March 1993, the separation authority approved the applicant's request for discharge under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 10, and directed the issuance of a UOTHC discharge.  On 26 March 1993, the applicant was discharged accordingly.  The DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) she was issued shows she completed a total of 3 years, 07 months, and 26 days of creditable active military service.

7.  The applicant provided two character reference letters written by a friend and former employer who described her as intelligent, capable, dedicated, and a personable young woman.

8.  On 4 March 1998, the Army Discharge Review Board (ADRB) denied the applicant's petition to upgrade her discharge.

9.  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 UOTHC discharge is normally considered appropriate.

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

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 contention that her UOTHC discharge should be upgraded and the evidence she submitted in support of her request was carefully reviewed and was found to lack merit.

2.  The evidence of record shows the applicant's request for separation under the provisions of chapter 10, Army Regulation 635-200, for the good of the service to avoid trial by court-martial was voluntary, administratively correct, and in compliance with applicable regulations.

3.  Records show the applicant was properly and equitably discharged in accordance with the regulations in effect at the time, all requirements of law and regulations were met, and the rights of the applicant were fully protected throughout the separation process.

4.  The applicant's records reveal a disciplinary history that included numerous dishonored checks and failure to maintain sufficient funds to cover said checks.  Based on this record of indiscipline, the applicant's service clearly did not meet the standards of acceptable conduct and performance of duty for Army personnel.  This misconduct rendered her service unsatisfactory.  Therefore, she is not entitled to an honorable or general discharge.

5.  The applicant was appropriately issued a UOTHC discharge based on the facts of the case.

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)                                         AR20110018086



3


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20110018086



2


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1