Search Decisions

Decision Text

ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | 20110023557
Original file (20110023557.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

		IN THE CASE OF:	  

		BOARD DATE:  7 June 2012

		DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20110023557 


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 his under other than honorable conditions discharge to an honorable discharge.

2.  The applicant states he would like his discharge upgraded for the sake of his wife, children, and grandchildren.

3.  The applicant provides his DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty).

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.  With prior active and inactive service, the applicant enlisted in the Regular Army on 28 February 1978 for a period of 3 years in the rank/grade of specialist four (SP4)/E-4.  He held military occupational specialty 63B (Light Wheel Vehicle Repairer) and he was assigned to the 704th Maintenance Battalion, Fort Carson, CO.

3.  On 22 May 1978, he accepted nonjudicial punishment under the provisions of Article 15 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) for dereliction of duties and wrongfully possessing marijuana.

4.  On 18 November 1978, he failed to return from ordinary leave.  Accordingly, on that date his unit reported him in an absent without leave (AWOL) status.  On 17 December 1978, he was dropped from the rolls of his unit as a deserter.  He was apprehended by military authorities and on 17 February 1983, and he was returned to military control at the U.S. Army Personnel Control Facility, Fort Dix, NJ.

5.  On 18 February 1983, court-martial charges were preferred against the applicant for being AWOL from 18 November 1978 to 17 February 1983.

6.  On 18 February 1983, he consulted with legal counsel and he was advised of the basis for the contemplated trial by court-martial for an offense punishable under the UCMJ which authorized the imposition of a bad conduct or a dishonorable discharge, the possible effects of a discharge under other than honorable conditions if his request for discharge in lieu of trial by court-martial were approved, and of the procedures and rights available to him.  Following consultation with legal counsel, he requested 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.

7.  In his request for discharge, he indicated:

* he was making this request of his own free will and he had not been subjected to any coercion whatsoever by any person
* he understood that by requesting discharge he was admitting guilt to the charges against him or of a lesser-included offense that also authorized the imposition of a bad conduct discharge or a discharge under other honorable conditions
* he acknowledged he understood if his discharge request were approved he could be deprived of many or all Army benefits, he could be ineligible for many or all benefits administered by the Veterans Administration
* he acknowledged he understood he could be deprived of his rights and benefits as a veteran under both Federal and State laws
* he stated that under no circumstances did he desire further rehabilitation and he had no desire to perform further military service
8.  On 28 February 1983, his immediate and intermediate commanders recommended approval of his request for discharge with the issuance of an under other than honorable conditions discharge.

9.  On 4 March 1983, 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 an under other than honorable conditions discharge and reduction to the lowest enlisted grade.  On 16 March 1983, the applicant was discharged accordingly.

10.  The DD Form 214 the applicant was issued shows he was discharged for the good of the service - in lieu of trial by court-martial with a characterization of service of under other than honorable conditions.  This form shows he completed 9 months and 20 days of creditable active service during this period with time lost 18 November 1978 to 16 February 1983.

11.  There is no indication he petitioned the Army Discharge Review Board for an upgrade of his discharge within that board's 15-year statute of limitations.

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

	a.  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.  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 discharge under other than honorable conditions is normally considered appropriate.

	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.

	c.  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.  

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant's record shows he was charged with the commission of an offense punishable under the UCMJ with a punitive discharge.  Discharges under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 10, are voluntary requests for discharge in lieu of trial by court-martial.  He voluntarily, willingly, and in writing, requested discharge from the Army in lieu of trial by court-martial.  All requirements of law and regulation were met and his rights were fully protected throughout the separation process.  Further, his discharge accurately reflects his overall record of service.

2.  Based on his record of indiscipline, specifically his extensive history of AWOL, the applicant's service clearly did not meet the standards of acceptable conduct and performance of duty for Army personnel.  This misconduct rendered his service unsatisfactory.

3.  In view of the foregoing, there is no basis for granting the applicant an honorable or a general 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)                                         AR20110023557



3


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20110023557



2


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

Similar Decisions

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2013 | 20130006112

    Original file (20130006112.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 28 February 1984, the separation authority approved the applicant's request for discharge for the good of the service in lieu of trial by court-martial under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 10, with a discharge under other than honorable conditions and reduction to the lowest enlisted grade. Effective 1 October 1979, military personnel who were discharged for the purpose of immediate reenlistment were no longer issued a separate DD Form 214. Prior to 1 October 1979,...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2013 | 20130000463

    Original file (20130000463.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant requests upgrade of her under other than honorable conditions discharge. The DD Form 214 the applicant was issued shows she was discharged for the good of the service - in lieu of trial by court-martial with a characterization of service of under other than honorable conditions. 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...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140003709

    Original file (20140003709.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant requests an upgrade of his under other than honorable conditions discharge. The DD Form 214 the applicant was issued shows he was discharged for the good of the service - in lieu of trial by court-martial with a characterization of service of under other than honorable conditions. Although an honorable or general discharge is authorized, a discharge under other than honorable conditions is normally considered appropriate.

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140003709

    Original file (20140003709 .txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant requests an upgrade of his under other than honorable conditions discharge. The DD Form 214 the applicant was issued shows he was discharged for the good of the service - in lieu of trial by court-martial with a characterization of service of under other than honorable conditions. Although an honorable or general discharge is authorized, a discharge under other than honorable conditions is normally considered appropriate.

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140012272

    Original file (20140012272.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    He understood if his request were accepted he could receive a discharge under other than honorable conditions and that by submitting his request he was admitting he was guilty of the charge against him. Although an honorable or general discharge is authorized, a discharge under other than honorable conditions is normally considered appropriate. c. Paragraph 3-7b provides that a general discharge is a separation from the Army under honorable conditions.

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090020579

    Original file (20090020579.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 6 April 1983, the separation authority approved the applicant's request for discharge and directed that he receive an under other than honorable conditions discharge. On 2 May 1983, the applicant was discharged accordingly. Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 3-7b, provides that a general discharge is a separation from the Army under honorable conditions.

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080014244

    Original file (20080014244.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Application for correction of military records (with supporting documents provided, if any). THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE: 1. On 26 January 1984, the applicant was discharged under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 10 by reason of for the good of the service – in lieu of court-martial.

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100008032

    Original file (20100008032.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant requests an upgrade of his under other than honorable conditions discharge to an honorable discharge. The DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) he was issued shows he was discharged for the good of the service - in lieu of a court-martial, with a characterization of service of under other than honorable conditions. Although an honorable or general discharge is authorized, a discharge under other than honorable conditions is normally considered...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140017620

    Original file (20140017620.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant requests an upgrade of his under other than honorable conditions discharge. On 31 March 1982, 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 an under other than honorable conditions discharge and reduction to the lowest enlisted grade. The applicant was discharged on 5 May 1982.

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080019162

    Original file (20080019162.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 23 January 1984, court-martial charges were preferred against the applicant for one specification of being AWOL during the period from on or about 31 October 1983 until on or about 17 January 1984. In his request for discharge, the applicant indicated that he understood that by requesting discharge, he was admitting guilt to the charges against him, or of a lesser included offense, that also authorized the imposition of a bad conduct discharge or a discharge under other honorable...