IN THE CASE OF:
BOARD DATE: 27 March 2014
DOCKET NUMBER: AR20130013657
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 general discharge.
2. The applicant states that he was 19 years of age when he joined the Army and was immature and uncertain about the requirements of the Army and after about 1 year he was involved in an automobile accident in which he suffered a dislocated hip, broken pelvis and dislocated shoulder when he was thrown from the car. He goes on to state that that event caused a downward spiral of his behavior because of medications and his inability to be part of his company in a physical way because he walked with a cane and was assigned various jobs which was frustrating having to work in different companies and having different bosses all the time. He continues by stating that he went home on leave and his friend was in a very bad car accident and he felt obligated to stay and help him and he requested an extension of his leave, which was denied. He further states that he made the unfortunate decision to stay an additional 28 days and then turned himself in. He received nonjudicial punishment which included 30 days in the brig at Quantico; however, he was released after 25 days for good behavior. He concludes by stating that he has tried to live as a good citizen and has a number of medical problems resulting from the car accident but is unable to receive benefits from the Department of Veterans Affairs because of his discharge.
3. The applicant provides a three-page letter dated in 2013 which he states is a copy of a statement he submitted at his NJP hearing.
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. After serving in the North Carolina Army National Guard as a light weapons infantryman, the applicant enlisted in the Regular Army on 2 November 1995 for a period of 3 years and assignment to Fort Drum, New York as an infantryman.
3. On 30 January 1996, nonjudicial punishment (NJP) was imposed against him for failure to go to his place of duty, dereliction of duty, and willful disobedience of a noncommissioned officer (NCO).
4. On 12 August 1997, he was convicted by a summary court-martial of being absent without leave (AWOL) from 23 July to 6 August 1997 and for using his government American Express card during the period 3 May to 28 June 1997 while not in a temporary duty status. He was sentenced to confinement for 30 days, reduction to the pay grade of E-1 and a forfeiture of $580.00,
5. On 7 October 1997, the applicants commander notified him that he was initiating action to discharge him from the service under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 14-12c, due to misconduct. He cited the applicants disciplinary records and repeated misconduct as the basis for his recommendation.
6. After consulting with defense counsel, the applicant submitted a request for a conditional waiver in which he agreed to waive his rights in return for a guarantee of receiving at least a general discharge.
7. The entire chain of command recommended against approving the conditional waiver and the convening authority agreed and directed that he be discharged under other than honorable conditions.
8. Accordingly, he was discharged under other than honorable conditions on 24 December 1997 under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 14-12C, due to misconduct. He had served 2 years, 1 month and 8 days of active service and had 38 days of lost time due to AWOL and confinement.
9. There is no evidence in the available records to show that he applied to the Army Discharge Review Board (ADRB) for an upgrade of his discharge within that boards 15-year statute of limitations.
10. 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.
11. Paragraph 3-7a of Army Regulation 635-200 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.
12. 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 contentions regarding his discharge have been noted; however, they are not sufficiently mitigating when compared to the repeated nature of his offenses during such a short period of service. The applicant's overall service simply did not rise to the level of a discharge under honorable conditions.
2. 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.
3. Accordingly, the characterization and the narrative reason for separation were appropriate for the circumstances of his case.
4. In the absence of evidence showing that an error or injustice occurred in his case, there appears to be no basis to grant his request.
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) AR20130013657
3
ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
1
ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20130013657
2
ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
1
ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | 20110009532
THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE: 1. The applicant requests his undesirable discharge (UD) be upgraded to a general discharge. Chapter 10 of the version in effect at the time provided that a member who committed an offense or offenses for which the authorized punishment included a punitive discharge could submit a request for discharge for the good of the service at any time after court-martial charges were preferred.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090009030
DA Form 188 (Extract Copy of Morning Report), dated 22 April 1970, shows the applicant's duty status as follows: a. on 5 April 1970, he departed AWOL at 1700 hours from Company B, 3rd Battalion, 5th Advanced Individual Training (AIT) Brigade, Fort Polk, LA; b. on 8 April 1970, he was moved from AWOL status to surrendered at Holy Name of Jesus Hospital, Gadsden AL, at 2145 hours with scalp lacerations, a back injury, and the line-of-duty status undetermined; c. on 9 April 1970, he was shown...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100008377
The applicant provides a copy the report of the 28 June 1989 accident in which his mother was killed. The applicant acknowledged he understood that if he received a discharge certificate/character of service which was less than honorable, he could make application to the Army Discharge Review Board (ADRB) or the ABCMR for upgrading; however, an act of consideration by either board did not imply that his discharge would be upgraded. On 13 September 1990 the applicant was separated with an...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2013 | 20130005910
On 1 March 1979, the applicant's unit commander notified him of his intent to initiate action to separate him from the service under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations Enlisted Personnel), paragraph 14-33b(1), for frequent incidents of a discreditable nature with civil or military authorities; specifically, three Article 15s, a letter of reprimand, and unsatisfactory performance of duties beginning on 12 July 1977. A discharge under other than honorable...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080010299
IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 19 August 2008 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20080010299 THE BOARD CONSIDERED THE FOLLOWING EVIDENCE: 1. The ABCMR further determined that the applicant failed to submit evidence that showed to the satisfaction of the Board, or that it otherwise satisfactorily appeared, the record was in error or unjust. The applicant had the following three periods of AWOL while assigned to the 73rd Field Artillery: a. from 18 August to 2 September 1976; b. from 8 September to 14 September...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140014201
THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE: 1. The applicant requests her general, under honorable conditions discharge be upgraded to honorable. When she returned, her drill sergeant told her to just tell them that she had a drug problem as a child and they would let her out of the Army, then they could be together.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | 20110002773
The ADRB review shows: a. a CID Report of Investigation (ROI), dated 15 March 2004, indicated the applicant was charged with reckless driving resulting in personal injury, negligent homicide, and reckless driving (all acts occurring on 13 August 2003); b. the specific facts and circumstances leading to his discharge were not in the available records; and c. a DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) was on file that indicated he was discharged on 2 September 2004...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090019118
On 9 July 1997, the Army Discharge Review Board denied the applicants request for an upgrade of his discharge. When authorized, it is issued to a Soldier whose military record is satisfactory but not sufficiently meritorious to warrant an honorable discharge. The applicant's record of service shows he received three Article 15s and he was charged for being AWOL for 38 days.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | 20110002206
The applicant requests an upgrade of his undesirable discharge in two separate applications. The evidence of record shows he received NJP for being AWOL from his unit and a summary court-martial also for being AWOL. The characterization of service for this type of discharge is normally under other than honorable conditions and the evidence shows the applicant was aware of that prior to requesting discharge.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100007349
On 5 January 1989, the applicants commander notified him that he was initiating action to separate him from the service under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200 (Enlisted Separations), chapter 14-12b, for patterns of misconduct. He states he loves his wife and children and wants to do what is right for them and does not want to get out of the Army. The evidence of record shows he was medically cleared for separation under chapter 14-12b of Army Regulation 635-200, and there is no...