IN THE CASE OF:
BOARD DATE: 2 June 2015
DOCKET NUMBER: AR20140015864
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 her DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) be corrected by removing her lost time and crediting her with active service for that period.
2. The applicant states that she was mistakenly charged with being absent without leave (AWOL) from 31 May to 12 June 1983; however, she was never AWOL from duty. She also states that she was authorized to reside off post by her commander and no time should have been taken away from her which has resulted in her being denied Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) benefits.
3. The applicant provides a one-page letter explaining her application, two third-party character statements, and a copy of her 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 9 July 1981 for a period of 3 years and training as a finance specialist. She completed her basic training at Fort Jackson, South Carolina and her advanced individual training at Fort Benjamin Harrison, Indiana and was transferred to Fort Benning, Georgia for her first assignment.
3. During the period of 5 August 1982 to 20 April 1983, nonjudicial punishment was imposed by her commander against her on three occasions for failure to go to her appointed place of duty.
4. During the period of 21 June to 7 September 1982, she received three letters of reprimand from her commander for failure to go to her place of duty and disobeying a lawful general order by wearing fatigues to an off-post establishment.
5. On 3 September 1982, the applicants commander initiated a bar to reenlistment against her. He cited the applicants disciplinary record and her failure to improve her attitude or performance as the basis for his recommendation. The bar to reenlistment was approved on 4 October 1982.
6. On 1 June 1983, the applicants commander authenticated a DA Form 4187 (Personnel Action) reporting the applicant as being AWOL effective 31 May 1983.
7. On 8 June 1983, the applicant was apprehended by Criminal Investigation Division (CID) officials for the suspected offense of bigamy. The military police report indicates that she was married to another service member who was stationed in Germany and she filed for divorce with a civilian lawyer in February 1983 and remarried on 15 March 1983. The results of the investigation are not present in the available records.
8. On 10 June 1983, the applicants commander notified her that she was initiating action to discharge her from the service under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separation Enlisted Personnel), chapter 13 for unsatisfactory performance based on her apathy, lack of appropriate interest and inability to expend effort. The commander recommended a general, under honorable conditions discharge.
9. After consulting with counsel, the applicant waived her rights and elected not to submit a statement in her own behalf. In her waiver of rights statement, she acknowledged that she could expect to encounter substantial prejudice in civilian life if she received a general, under honorable conditions discharge. In addition, she acknowledged that she could be ineligible for many or all benefits as a veteran under both State and Federal laws. She and her appointed defense counsel signed the rights waiver statement.
10. On 15 June 1983, she accepted a fourth nonjudicial punishment under the provisions of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) for violation of Article 86, AWOL that commenced on 31 May 1983.
11. The appropriate authority approved the recommendation for discharge on 24 June 1983 and directed that she be furnished a General Discharge Certificate.
12. Accordingly, she was discharged under honorable conditions on 6 July 1983 under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 13, due to unsatisfactory performance. She had served 1 year, 11 months and 15 days of active service and had 13 days of lost time due to AWOL.
13. The applicant provided two character reference statements that state she is a member of her church and volunteers in her community helping the disadvantaged. She also worked for an elderly woman as her caretaker. Currently, she is in need of her VA benefits because she is ill and homeless.
14. Army Regulation 630-10 (Absence without Leave, Desertion, and Administration of Personnel Involved in Civilian Court Proceedings) provides, in pertinent part, that when a Soldier returns from an absence that is or appears to be unauthorized, the unit commander informally investigates the case and decides whether disciplinary action should be taken and if the Soldier should be charged with lost time. A Soldiers absence may be classified as authorized or unauthorized. Unauthorized absences are considered AWOL, unless excused. If not excused, the unauthorized absence is treated as lost time.
DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:
1. The applicants contention that she was not AWOL and that she should be credited with 13 days of additional active duty service has been noted and appears to lack merit.
2. The applicant had a history of failing to report to her appointed place of duty and received numerous letters of reprimand and nonjudicial punishment. Her commander reported her AWOL on 31 May 1983 and then on 15 June 1983 she accepted nonjudicial punishment for the AWOL period and did not demand trial by court-martial to dispute her period of AWOL. Based on her record of unsatisfactory performance, her commander initiated administrative separation action under the provisions of chapter 13, Army Regulation 635-200 and it was approved by the separation authority. She was separated with a general, under honorable conditions discharge on 6 July 1983 prior to completing her first full term of enlistment.
3. The applicant has failed to show through the evidence submitted with her application any facts to dispute her period of AWOL for which she accepted nonjudicial punishment. Therefore, in the absence of evidence to show otherwise, there appears to be no basis to grant her 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) AR20140015864
3
ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
1
ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20140015864
2
ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
1
ARMY | BCMR | CY2007 | 20070018325
On 13 January 1987, the separation authority approved the applicant's request for discharge for the good of the service in accordance with chapter 10 of Army regulation 635-200 and directed she receive an Under Other Than Honorable Conditions Discharge Certificate and be reduced to private/E-1. The DD Form 214 she was issued at the time of her discharge shows that she was discharged for the good of the service with an Under Other Than Honorable Conditions character of service. Furthermore,...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100013347
On 29 April 1983, the separation authority approved the applicant's request for discharge and directed the issuance of an Under Other Than Honorable Conditions Discharge Certificate. On 13 May 1983, the applicant was discharged accordingly. Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 3-7b, provides that a general discharge is a separation from the Army under honorable conditions.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2001 | 2001057520C070420
The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein. Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel. The Board notes that her medical records indicated that she received a relatively minor, though surely painful, second degree burn on her wrist while in basic training.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2005 | 20050000885C070206
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. At a mental status evaluation on 18 July 1983 the applicant's behavior was normal. The applicant was performing duty at the time she was separated.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2005 | 20050000885C070206
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. The Army rates only conditions determined to be physically unfitting at the time of discharge, thus compensating the individual for loss of a career; while the VA may rate any service connected impairment, including those that are detected after discharge, in order to compensate the individual for loss of civilian...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2012 | 20120019286
The applicant requests correction of her military records by removing her nonjudicial punishment (NJP) and the record of her being absent without leave (AWOL). The commander also stated the applicant had received 3 company grade NJPs and a summarized NJP. It states that the decision to file the NJP on the performance or restricted portion of the AMHRR will be determined by the imposing commander at the time punishment is imposed.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2007 | 20070009459
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 24 July 2007 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20070009459 I certify that hereinafter is recorded the true and complete record of the proceedings of the Army Board for Correction of Military Records in the case of the above-named individual. Incorporated herein by reference are military records which were summarized in the previous consideration of the applicant's case by the Army Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR) in Docket Number AC97-08759,...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2005 | 20050004165C070206
The applicant states, in effect, that he became mentally ill while serving on active duty. On 9 February 1984, the applicant was discharged with a general discharge under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 14, for misconduct (pattern of misconduct). The applicant’s record of service included three nonjudicial punishments and two periods of AWOL.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140005334
THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE: 1. The applicant requests an upgrade of her under other than honorable conditions discharge. Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 3-7a, provides that an honorable discharge is a separation from the Army with honor and entitles the recipient to benefits provided by law.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090003218
Application for correction of military records (with supporting documents provided, if any). THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE: 1. The discharge authority approved the separation action and directed the applicant be discharged with a general discharge.