BOARD DATE:	  21 August 2014

		DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20140001322 


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 discharge under other than honorable conditions to an honorable or a general discharge.

2.  The applicant states, in effect, after 13 years and 8 months of excellent military service he was involved in one incident, which was his only shortcoming, and he was discharged for it.  He believes it was an injustice.

3.  The applicant provides no additional evidence.

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 enlisted service in the Regular Army (RA), the applicant reenlisted in the RA on 2 March 1976.  He remained on active duty through continuous reenlistments and extensions.  He was promoted through the ranks to sergeant first class (E-7).

3.  On 19 December 1986, the applicant was notified that charges were pending against him for the following offenses:

* Attempting to steal $3,600.00 in U.S. currency, the property of the U.S. Government
* Preparing a temporary duty voucher for presentment for approval of payment for a claim against the U.S. Government in the amount of $3,600.00 for lodging expenses which was known to be false and fraudulent
* Making and using three lodging receipts containing statements that lodging expenses were $1,200.00 per month for 3 months, which he knew to be false and fraudulent

4.  The applicant acknowledged receipt of the notification.  After consulting with counsel, he submitted a request for discharge under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 10, for the good of the service in lieu of trial by court-martial.  In his request for discharge, the applicant acknowledged he understood:

* if his request for discharge was accepted, he could be discharged under other than honorable conditions and furnished an Under Other Than Honorable Conditions Discharge Certificate
* he could be deprived of many or all Army benefits as a result of the issuance of such a discharge
* he could be ineligible for many or all benefits administered by the Veterans Administration (VA)
* he could be deprived of his rights and benefits as a veteran under both Federal and State laws
* he could expect to encounter substantial prejudice in civilian life by reason of a discharge under other than honorable conditions
* he elected not to submit a statement in his own behalf

5.  On 17 February 1987, the separation authority approved his request for discharge under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 10, and directed the issuance of a discharge under other than honorable conditions.

6.  On 27 February 1987, the applicant was discharged under other than honorable conditions, under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 10, for the good of the service in lieu of trial by court-martial.  He completed 10 years, 11 months, and 26 days of net active service this period.  He also had 2 years, 6 months, and 7 days of prior active service.

7.  A review of the available records does not show that the applicant ever petitioned the Army Discharge Review Board for an upgrade of his discharge.

8.  Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations) sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel.

	a.  Chapter 10 provides 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.  Commanders would ensure that an individual was not coerced into submitting a request for discharge for the good of the service.  Consulting counsel would 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 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 would normally be furnished to an individual who was 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 contentions have been noted.

2.  He, a senior noncommissioned officer, had court-martial charges pending against him for making and using false receipts, presenting false claims to the Government, and attempting to steal $3,600.00 of U.S. currency, which are all serious acts of misconduct.  

3.  He submitted a request for discharge under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 10, for the good of the service in lieu of trial by court-martial.  In his request, he acknowledged he understood the effects of a discharge under other than honorable conditions.

4.  The type of discharge he received appropriately reflects his misconduct and does not appear to be unjust.

5.  In view of the foregoing, the applicant's request should be denied.

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)                                         AR20140001322



3


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20140001322



2


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1