IN THE CASE OF:
BOARD DATE: 30 September 2014
DOCKET NUMBER: AR20140002380
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 a general discharge.
2. The applicant states he has resolved the issues that prevented him from fulfilling his duties as a Soldier. He has made great strides to improve his life and future. He is now employed full-time and he works for the police department.
3. The applicant provides:
* DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty)
* Letter from the Ohio Peace Officer Training Academy
* Certificate of Achievement - Emergency Management Institute
* Certificate of Completion of the Peace Officer Basic Training Program
* Certificate of Completion of an Alcohol Addiction, Apprehension, and Prosecution course
* Certificate of Training, Ohio Basic Police Academy
* Certificate of Achievement - Corrections Academy
* Certificate of Achievement - Emergency Management Institute
* Three letters of support/character reference letters
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 records show he enlisted in the Regular Army for 3 years on 22 July 2003. He was subsequently assigned to Aberdeen Proving Ground, MD, for training.
3. On 2 August 2003, the applicant departed his basic training unit in an absent without leave (AWOL) status and was subsequently dropped from the rolls of the Army on 2 September 2003. He was apprehended by civil authorities in Ohio and returned to military control on 26 February 2004.
4. On 8 March 2004, court-martial charges were preferred against the applicant for one specification of being AWOL from on or about 2 August 2003 to on or about 26 February 2004.
5. On 8 March 2004, the applicant consulted with legal counsel and was advised of the basis for the contemplated trial by court-martial, the maximum permissible punishment authorized under the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ), of the possible effects of an under other than honorable conditions discharge if the request was approved, and of the procedures and rights that were available to him. Following consultation with legal counsel, he requested discharge for the good of the service in lieu of trial by court-martial in accordance with chapter 10 of Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations Enlisted Personnel).
6. In his request for discharge, the applicant indicated 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 dishonorable discharge. He further acknowledged he understood that if the discharge request was approved, he could be deprived of many or all Army benefits, that he could be ineligible for many or all benefits administered by the Department of Veterans Affairs, and that he could be deprived of her rights and benefits as a veteran under both Federal and State law.
7. On 9 March 2004, the applicants immediate commander recommended approval of the applicants request for discharge and remarked that his conduct had rendered him triable by a court-martial under circumstances which could
have led to a bad conduct or a dishonorable discharge. Based on his record, punishment was expected to have had a minimal rehabilitative efforts and a discharge was in the best interests of all concerned. He further recommended an under other than honorable conditions character of service.
8. On 11 March 2004, the separation authority approved the applicant's request for discharge and directed that he receive an under other than honorable conditions discharge and be reduced to the lowest enlisted grade, if applicable. Accordingly, the applicant was discharged on 17 March 2004. The DD Form 214 he was issued shows he was discharged under other than honorable conditions in accordance with chapter 10 of Army Regulation 635-200, in lieu of trial by court-martial. This form also shows that he completed 28 days of creditable active military service and had lost time from 2 August 2003 to 25 February 2004.
9. On 26 October 2007, the Army Discharge Review Board (ADRB) reviewed the characterization of his service but found it proper and equitable. As such, the ADRB denied his petition for a change to the characterization of his service.
10. The applicant submitted:
a. Multiple certificates of training, achievement, and/or commendation from various academies or police departments in the state of Ohio.
b. Multiple character reference letters and/or letters of support from various individuals acknowledging that he made a mistake but deserves a second chance. The authors agree he is now a changed person.
11. Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel. 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.
a. 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.
b. 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 applicants records shows he was charged with the commission of offenses punishable under the UCMJ with a punitive discharge. Discharges under the provisions of chapter 10 of Army Regulation 635-200 are voluntary requests for discharge in lieu of trial by court-martial. The applicant 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 the rights of the applicant were fully protected throughout the separation process. Further, the applicants discharge accurately reflects his overall record of service.
2. Service in the Army is a privilege, not a right. The applicant enlisted in the Regular Army on 22 July 2003. The evidence of record shows, 11 days later, he departed in an AWOL status and 30 days later, he was a deserter. His desertion was only terminated by civilian apprehension.
3. Based on this record of indiscipline, his service clearly did not meet the standards of acceptable conduct and performance of duty for Army personnel. This misconduct also renders his service unsatisfactory. Therefore, he is not entitled to an upgrade of his discharge to 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) AR20140002380
3
ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
1
ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20140002380
2
ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
1
NAVY | DRB | 2004 Marine | MD04-00678
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY NAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENT ex-PFC, USMC Docket No. The Applicant requested the characterization of service received at the time of discharge changed to honorable. Issues, as stated Issues presented by the Applicant’s American Legion representative supersede those listed on the original application:1 (Equity) Family problems, father’s illness and death, contributed to and mitigate misconduct.
ARMY | DRB | CY2013 | AR20130006019
The applicant requests to change his characterization of service from under other than honorable to uncharacterized discharge. Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations) sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel. Paragraph 3-7b provides that a general discharge is a separation from the Army under honorable conditions.
USMC | DRB | 2005_Marine | MD0500261
The Applicant requests the Discharge Characterization of Service received at the time of discharge be changed to general (under honorable conditions) and the Narrative Reason for Separation be changed to “General to have my Code 4 upgraded.” The Applicant requests a documentary record discharge review. The fourth Marine who came with us, his whole plan was hoping that going U A they would discharge him from the Marine Corps. I also help the other juveniles by talking about my mistakes I...
ARMY | DRB | CY2011 | AR20110003609
Applicant Name: ????? The analyst noted the applicant's issue requesting that his narrative reason for separation be changed. However, in review of the applicants entire service record, the analyst found that these accomplishments did not overcome the reason for discharge and characterization of service granted.
NAVY | DRB | 2004 Marine | MD04-00831
Applicant failed to submit a statement within the authorized 20 day period.921008: Letter of intent to administratively separate under other than honorable conditions for the failure to participate in reserve training was sent via certified mail, return receipt requested. When personally served with the notification of separation proceedings letter, acknowledgement to rights, and the purpose and scope of the BCNR and NDRB on 8 October 1992, PFC M__ indicated that he would gladly sign...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2007 | 20070017514
City of Conneaut, Applicants Performance Evaluation and/or Review, dated 15 January 2000. f. Tab 6, contains the following evidence: 1. The applicants DD Form 214 shows that he was discharged on 12 June 1981, under the provisions of chapter 10 of Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations), with an Under Other Than Honorable Conditions Discharge character of service. There is no evidence in the available records that shows the applicant was undergoing family problems at the time.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | 20110013867
His record includes a National Guard Bureau Form 22 (Report of Separation and Record of Service) showing he was separated from the Ohio ARNG effective 25 May 2005 by reason of being DFR and his service was uncharacterized. He provides a DD Form 214 showing, on 14 October 2005, he was discharged under other than honorable conditions in lieu of trial by court-martial under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200 (Active Duty Enlisted Administrative Separations), chapter 10. His voluntary...
NAVY | DRB | 2004 Marine | MD04-00063
The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. After a thorough review of the records, supporting documents, facts, and circumstances unique to this case, no impropriety or inequity in the characterization of the Applicant’s service was discovered by the NDRB. th Marine Division] directed the Applicant's discharge under conditions other than honorable by reason of misconduct due to unsatisfactory participation in the Ready...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080000303
The DD Form 214 he was issued at the time of his discharge shows he was discharged for the good of the service, under the provisions of chapter 10 of Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations), with an Under Other Than Honorable Conditions Discharge character of service. Army Regulation 635-200 states, in pertinent part, that prior to discharge or release from active duty, individuals will be assigned RE codes, based on their service records or the reason for discharge. With respect...
ARMY | DRB | CY2013 | AR20130016233
Personnel actions indicating the applicants duty status changed from AWOL, to DFR, to apprehension by civil authorities, to present for duty. POST-SERVICE ACTIVITY: The applicant states, in effect, since his discharge he continued his education to achieve a bachelor of science and a master in administration. No Counsel: None Witnesses/Observers: No Board Vote: Character Change: 0 No Change: 5 Reason Change: 0 No Change: 5 (Board member names available upon request) Board Action...