Search Decisions

Decision Text

ARMY | BCMR | CY2013 | 20130020399
Original file (20130020399.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

		IN THE CASE OF:	  

		BOARD DATE:	  8 July 2014

		DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20130020399 


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 discharge to an honorable discharge.

2.  The applicant states:

	a.  Sometimes in life we all encounter certain decisions that we must make; whether right or wrong, we have to accept those decisions.

	b.  He looks back at the decision he made with regret.  He considered himself a good Soldier who was faced with a challenging decision.  His wife at the time was pregnant with their first child and she was experiencing complications.

	c.  His unit was preparing to deploy to Italy and he requested a change in his orders to remain stateside until the baby was born but the request went unheeded.

	d.  Seeing how distraught he was, several higher-ranking people suggested he could be processed out if he stayed away for 30 days.  Unfortunately, that was the decision he made.

	e.  He wishes there was a counselor at the time he could have spoken to about the consequences of his actions.  He had never been in trouble, he always followed orders, he attended the M-60 machine gun with top honors, and attended airborne school.

	f.  Over the past 27 years, he has had to live with that decision and he would deem it an honor if his status could be changed to honorable.  He had to overcome the disgrace he placed upon himself and he looks forward to being able to stand up straight and salute the flag of our country.

3.  The applicant provides a DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) and a copy of his real estate license.

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 military records are not available for review.  His records were requested from the repository in St. Louis, MO, without success.  This case is being considered based on his DD Form 214.

3.  His DD Form 214 shows:

	a.  He enlisted in the Regular Army on 3 January 1985 and he served in military occupational specialty 11B (Infantryman).

	b.  He was awarded or authorized the Army Service Ribbon, Parachutist Badge, Expert Marksmanship Qualification Badge with Rifle Bar, and the Sharpshooter Marksmanship Qualification Badge with Grenade Bar.

	c.  He was discharged on 23 July 1986 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.

	d.  He was assigned a character of service of "under other than honorable conditions."

	e.  He accrued 54 days of time lost (from 17 April to 9 June 1986) for being absent without leave (AWOL).

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

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

	a.  Chapter 10 provides that a member who commits 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 at any time after court-martial charges are preferred and must include the individual's admission of guilt.  Commanders will ensure that an individual is not coerced into submitting a request for discharge for the good of the service.  Consulting counsel will advise the member concerning the elements of the offense or offenses charged, the type of discharge normally given under the provisions of this chapter, the loss of Veterans Administration (VA) benefits, and the possibility of prejudice in civilian life because of the characterization of such a discharge.  A discharge under other than honorable conditions is normally issued to an individual who is discharged for the good of the service.

	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 request for an upgrade of his under other than honorable conditions discharge has been carefully considered.

2.  The applicant's record is void of the specific facts and circumstances surrounding his discharge.  It appears that he was charged with the commission of offense(s) punishable under the Uniform Code of Military Justice (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.  The applicant is presumed to have voluntarily, willingly, and in writing, requested discharge from the Army in lieu of trial by court-martial.  In doing so, he would have admitted guilt and waived his opportunity to appear before a court-martial.  It is also presumed that all requirements of law and regulation were met, and the rights of the applicant were fully protected throughout the separation process.  Furthermore, in the absence of evidence showing otherwise, it must be presumed his discharge accurately reflects his overall record of service.

3.  His record of indiscipline includes 54 days of time lost and presumably, court-martial charges.  Based on his record of indiscipline, his overall record of service did not support the issuance of an honorable or a general discharge by the separation authority at the time and it does not support an upgrade of his discharge now.

4.  His post-service accomplishments were noted; however, without evidence of error or injustice in his separation processing, there is no basis to grant the applicant's requested relief.

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)                                         AR20130020399



3


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20130020399



2


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

Similar Decisions

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090006395

    Original file (20090006395.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 25 April 1980, court-martial charges were preferred against the applicant for one specification of being AWOL during the period on or about 10 March to 21 April 1980. 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 conditions. Furthermore, there is no...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140008242

    Original file (20140008242.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant requests an upgrade of his under other than honorable conditions discharge. e. A DD Form 214 that shows he was discharged on 24 March 1980 under the provisions of chapter 10 of Army Regulation 635-200, for the good of the service - in lieu of court-martial, with a character of service of under other than honorable conditions. _______ _ X______ ___ CHAIRPERSON I certify that herein is recorded the true and complete record of the proceedings of the Army Board for Correction of...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2013 | 20130005729

    Original file (20130005729.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    It also shows he was discharged for the good of the service in lieu of trial by court-martial under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations – Enlisted Personnel), chapter 10, with his service characterized as under other than honorable conditions. The ADRB indicated the upgrade was based on the fact that the applicant had excellent service with no other record of indiscipline up until he committed the offense for which he requested discharge in lieu of trial by...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2013 | 20130018854

    Original file (20130018854.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    His DD Form 214 (Armed Forces of the United States Report of Transfer or Discharge) shows he was discharged under the provisions of chapter 10, Army Regulation 635-200 for the good of the service with an under other than honorable conditions characterization of service. Although an honorable or general discharge is authorized, an undesirable discharge was normally considered appropriate at the time. His record does not contain and he has not provided any evidence to show the charges...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140009282

    Original file (20140009282.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant requests an upgrade of his discharge under other than honorable conditions to honorable. His records do contain an endorsement, dated 3 July 1980, that shows his discharge under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations – Enlisted Personnel), chapter 10 (discharge for the good of the service) was approved on 3 July 1980. Based on his record of indiscipline, his overall record of service did not support the issuance of an honorable or a general discharge...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2012 | 20120000347

    Original file (20120000347.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    However, his record contains a DD Form 214 that shows he was discharged on 13 February 1972 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, with an under other than honorable conditions discharge and 171 days of time lost. There is no evidence showing he applied to the Army Discharge Review Board for an upgrade of his discharge within that board's 15-year statute of...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2012 | 20120001550

    Original file (20120001550.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    However, his record contains a DD Form 214 that shows he was discharged on 12 March 1976 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, with his service characterized as under conditions other than honorable and issuance of a DD Form 258A (Undesirable Discharge Certificate). There is no evidence the applicant petitioned the Army Discharge Review Board (ADRB) for an...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2013 | 20130020332

    Original file (20130020332.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    However, his record contains a duly-constituted DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) that shows he was discharged on 21 January 1980 under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations Enlisted Personnel) for the good of the service in lieu of trial by court-martial with a UOTHC characterization of service. Although an honorable or general discharge is authorized, a discharge UOTHC is normally considered appropriate. During the period of...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | 20110008172

    Original file (20110008172.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant requests upgrade of his undesirable discharge to an honorable discharge or changed to a medical discharge. The DD Form 214 issued at the time of his discharge shows he was discharged on 28 October 1976 under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 10, with an Undesirable Discharge Certificate. Based on this record of indiscipline and in view of the fact he voluntarily requested discharge to avoid a court-martial that could have resulted in a punitive discharge, his...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2013 | 20130001287

    Original file (20130001287.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    It also shows he was separated under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations – Enlisted Personnel), chapter 10, by reason of conduct triable by court-martial with his service characterized as under other than honorable conditions. Based on his record of indiscipline, his overall record of service did not support the issuance of an honorable or general discharge by the separation authority at the time and it does not support an upgrade of his discharge now. ...