IN THE CASE OF:	  

		BOARD DATE:	  7 August 2012

		DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20120002112 


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 upgrade of his under other than honorable conditions (UOTHC) discharge to an honorable discharge and correction of his DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) to show he was Airborne qualified.  

2.  He states:

   a.  he believes his discharge should be changed because he served well and honorably and he was supposed to be discharged in March instead of October 1996.
   
   b.  his military occupational specialty (MOS) was changed in January 1996 and it was very upsetting because he had moved his family back to Alabama.  This upset him to the point that he went (absent without leave) AWOL.
   
   c.  he now realizes this wasn't the proper way to handle the situation.
   
   d.  the Airborne status was earned.  

3.  He provides his DD Form 214.  



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 11 June 1993 for a period of three years.  Upon completion of basic and advanced individual training, he was awarded MOS 94B (Food Service Specialist).  He was assigned to Company A, 1st Battalion, 507th Parachute Infantry Regiment, Fort Benning, GA in October 1993, for basic airborne training.  After completion of airborne training, he was reassigned to Fort Bragg, NC.

3.  His service record includes the following documents which indicate:

	a.  two DA Forms 4187 (Personnel), dated 2 December 1993, he was AWOL from 29 November 1993 to 30 November 1993;

	b.  Permanent Orders 212-456, dated 9 November 1993, he was awarded the Parachutist Badge for successful completion of Airborne training; 

   c.  DA Form 2-1 (Personnel Qualification Record – Part II), he didn't complete basic airborne training in 1993;

	d.  Permanent Orders 140-263, dated 19 July 1994, he was awarded the Parachutist Badge successful completion of Airborne training; and 

   e.  Orders 10-03, dated 8 August 1994, he was awarded special qualification identifier (SQI) "P" (indicating Parachutist).  

4.  He was advanced to specialist on 11 August 1995.  

5.  The U.S. Army Human Resources Command, Enlisted Conversion Chart  indicates MOS 94B was redesignated 92G (Food Service Specialist), effective 
1 October 1995.
6.  On 12 June 1996, charges were preferred against him for being AWOL from 
8 February to 5 June 1996.

7.  He consulted with legal counsel and voluntarily requested discharge for the good of the service under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations), chapter 10.  In doing so, he admitted guilt to the offense charged and acknowledged he might encounter substantial prejudice in civilian life and that he might be ineligible for many or all Army benefits administered by the Department of Veterans Affairs if a UOTHC discharge was issued.  He didn’t submit statements in his own behalf.  

8.  The separation authority approved his request for discharge under the provisions of chapter 10, Army Regulation 635-200, for the good of the service - in lieu of court-martial with a UOTHC discharge.  The applicant was reduced to private, E-1.

9.  On 16 October 1996, he was discharged under the provisions of chapter 10, Army Regulation 635-200, for the good of the service with a UOTHC discharge.  He completed 3 years and 7 days creditable active service and he had 121 days of lost time.  

10.  His DD Form 214 shows in:

* item 11 (Primary Specialty), his MOS as 92G and no entry indicating he was awarded SQI "P"
* item 13 (Decorations, Medals, Badges, Citations and Campaign Ribbons Awarded or Authorized (all periods of service)), no entry indicating he was awarded or authorized the Parachutist Badge
* item 14 (Military Education (Course title, number of weeks, and month and year completed)), no entry indicating he completed Airborne training 

11.  His service record does not indicate he applied to the Army Discharge Review Board for an upgrade of his discharge within its 15-year statute of limitations.

12.  Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel.
   a.  Chapter 10 of that regulation 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 UOTHC discharge is normally considered appropriate.

   b.  Paragraph 3-7a states 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 states 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.  

13.  Army Regulation 600-8-22 (Military Awards) states award of the basic Parachutist Badge requires that an individual must have satisfactorily completed the prescribed proficiency tests while assigned or attached to an airborne unit or the Airborne Department of the Infantry School or have participated in at least one combat parachute jump.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant's service record shows he was AWOL on two separate occasions for a total of 121 days.  

2.  His contention that he went AWOL because his MOS was changed in January 1996 and this was very upsetting to him because he had moved his family back to Alabama is acknowledged.  

3.  The evidence of record indicates his MOS 94B was redesignated 92G in October 1995.  However, this was not an MOS “change”; he was still a food service specialist.

4.  The applicant's voluntary request for discharge under the provisions of chapter 10, Army Regulation 635-200, for the good of the service - in lieu of trial by court-martial was administratively correct and in conformance with applicable regulations.  His service record does not indicate the request was made under coercion or duress.  

5.  Based on his record of indiscipline, his service clearly does not meet the standards of acceptable conduct and performance of duty for Army personnel.  Therefore, he is not entitled to an honorable or a general discharge.

6.  His service record shows he was issued orders in November 1993 which awarded him the Parachutist Badge for successful completion of Airborne training.  It appears these orders may have been issued prior to his completion of the course.  He was issued orders in July 1994 which awarded him the Parachutist Badge for successful completion of Airborne training.

7.  He was issued orders which show he was awarded SQI "P" and he was assigned to Fort Bragg, NC after completion of Airborne training.

8.  Therefore, it would be appropriate to amend his DD Form 214 to reflect the SQI of "P" at the end of his MOS, one award of Parachutist Badge, and to show he completed the Basic Airborne Course.

BOARD VOTE:

________  ________  ________  GRANT FULL RELIEF 

____X____  ___X_____  ____X____  GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF 

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

________  ________  ________  DENY APPLICATION

BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION:

1.  The Board determined that the evidence presented was sufficient to warrant a recommendation for partial relief.  As a result, the Board recommends that all Department of the Army records of the individual concerned be corrected by:

	a.  deleting the entry "92G100000 FOOD SERVICE SPECIALIST" from item 11 and replacing it with the entry "92G1P00000 FOOD SERVICE SPECIALIST" ;

	b.  amending item 13 to add award of the Parachutist Badge; and 

	c.  amending item 14 to add the entry " Basic Airborne Course, 3 Weeks, July 1994."

2.  The Board further determined that the evidence presented is insufficient to warrant a portion of the requested relief.  As a result, the Board recommends denial of so much of the application that pertains to upgrade of his UOTHC to an honorable discharge.




      _______ _   _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)                                         AR20120002112





3


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20120002112



2


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1