BOARD DATE: 11 May 2017 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20160000654 BOARD VOTE: _________ _______ ________ GRANT FULL RELIEF ________ ________ ________ GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF ________ ________ ________ GRANT FORMAL HEARING ____x____ ___x_____ ____x____ DENY APPLICATION 2 Enclosures 1. Board Determination/Recommendation 2. Evidence and Consideration BOARD DATE: 11 May 2017 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20160000654 BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION: The evidence presented does not demonstrate the existence of a probable error or injustice. Therefore, the Board determined 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. BOARD DATE: 11 May 2017 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20160000654 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 general under honorable conditions. 2. The applicant states, in effect: a. As he reflects on his military career, he was honored to serve, and he is disappointed that his career ended in dishonor. He was a young man with great expectations and intelligence, and just like his father (a retired sergeant first class) and grandfather (a World War II Veteran), he had a passion to serve his country. Before he joined the military, and while he was still in college, he married and started a family. He believes he was too young and took on too much responsibility before he was ready. He takes full responsibility for the actions that led to his discharge. He is not proud of his juvenile actions while on active duty and regrets all that occurred. b. He started his military career early. He was the son of a career Soldier, and saw his father retire from an Army he loved and honored. He wanted to follow his father's example, so he joined the Junior Reserve Officers' Training Corps (JROTC) and earned numerous awards, to include Cadet of the Year. He received a scholarship to attend a military institute, but ended up going to another college, where he enrolled in the ROTC. While in the ROTC, he joined the Ranger battalion, and made the National Dean's List. c. He met his now ex-wife, and they married after she became pregnant. He joined the U.S. Army Reserve (USAR) and, during basic combat training, he was selected to be a squad leader. He also participated in the Soldier/Trainee of the Cycle competition. After completion of training, he enter active duty. d. Upon his arrival in Germany, he was assigned to the unit supply room, where he excelled as a logistics specialist. His unit sent him to school to become qualified as a PLL (Prescribed Load List)/TAMMS (The Army Maintenance Management System) Specialist. He graduated as the top student. e. At that point, he had two children; he and his wife were young, and far from home. While he was away participating in REFORGER (Return of Forces to Germany), his phone bill "got out of control," and the phone company turned off his phone. [REFORGER was an annual exercise conducted during the Cold War era where units from the U.S. practiced rapid deployments to Germany.] f. In addition, he had his car shipped to Germany, but it did not pass the inspection. The financial strain became overwhelming for his young wife and their marriage. She started writing checks that were returned, and was staying out for weeks at a time. He was called in from the field because their babysitter called his battery commander. The babysitter complained his wife had left their children and had been gone for days. g. He was barred from reenlistment due to his wife's bad checks and her misconduct as a sponsored dependent. He was advised to send her and his children home. Shortly after that, his wife's sister died, and they returned home on emergency leave. He and his wife agreed she and the children would remain in the United States until he returned from Germany. He thought this would be an opportunity to resurrect his career. h. He proved himself as a hardworking, intelligent, and committed young Soldier. As he was attempting to get his career back on track, his wife asked for a divorce and threatened to take their children. He panicked, and, uncharacteristically, decided to withdraw all the money in his bank account; he sent the money to his wife. What he did not realize was the bank did not register his withdrawal. He subsequently made more withdrawals that caused him to be $1,300 overdrawn. To this day, he regrets what happened, though he affirms he paid back all of the money. i. He was discharged under other than honorable conditions based on the provisions of chapter 10 (Discharge for the Good of the Service), Army Regulation (AR) 635-200 (Personnel Separations - Enlisted Personnel). His experience in the Army has molded him into a responsible man and sounding board for young men to make better decisions. He has since risen to the position of Vice President of Underwriter Performance Review for a major bank. He is a deacon/leader in his church, received numerous career certifications, and he has raised three wonderful children. Not all of his experiences in the military were bad; he was trusted to perform his duties and excelled as a Soldier. However, he feels he failed as a husband and did not make wise choices. He asks the Board to give more weight to the quality of his duty performance rather than his juvenile actions. 3. The applicant provides: * Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Form 70-3101 (Request for Information), dated 22 March 1993 * four letters of support * two DD Forms 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty), ending on 1 March 1990 and 1 February 1993, respectively 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. Having had prior enlisted service in the USAR, the applicant enlisted in the Regular Army on 18 September 1990 at age 21. He held military occupational specialty 13B (Cannon Crewmember). He was assigned to Germany on 1 October 1990. 3. On 16 March 1992, while in Germany, the applicant's commander initiated a bar to reenlistment based on indebtedness. The battalion commander approved the commander's recommendation on 16 March 1992. 4. On 4 January 1993, his commander preferred court-martial charges against him for: * eight instances of stealing $145 from the same bank, but in various locations, and for stealing $150 from that same bank on one occasion * dishonorably failing to pay $1,873.85 to an auto body shop 5. On 11 January 1993, the applicant consulted with counsel. a. Counsel advised him of the nature of his rights under the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ), the elements of the offenses charged (as well as any relevant lesser-included offenses), and that at least one of the charges authorized the imposition of either a bad conduct or a dishonorable discharge. Counsel also informed him the evidence had established guilt beyond a reasonable doubt, and instructed him as to the maximum permissible punishment authorized under the UCMJ. b. Subsequent to receiving legal counsel, he voluntarily requested discharge for the good of the service in lieu of trial by court-martial under the provisions of chapter 10, AR 635-200. 6. He further acknowledged that he: * was making the request of his own free will and he had not been subjected to any coercion whatsoever by any person * understood by requesting discharge, he was admitting guilt to at least one of the charges against him, or of a lesser included offense that also authorized the imposition of a bad conduct or a dishonorable discharge * understood if his 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 VA * understood he could be deprived of his rights and benefits as a veteran under both Federal and State laws 7. On 25 January 1993, the separation authority approved the applicant's request for discharge and directed he receive an under other than honorable conditions discharge. He was discharged accordingly on 1 February 1993. 8. His DD Form 214 reflects he was discharged under other than honorable conditions, for the good of the service-in lieu of trial by court-martial, under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 10. It also shows he completed 2 years, 4 months, and 14 days of net active service this period. In addition, it reflected 2 months and 5 days of prior active service and 5 months and 19 days of prior inactive service. He was awarded or authorized the: * National Defense Service Medal * Army Service Ribbon * Overseas Service Ribbon 9. There is no indication the applicant applied to the Army Discharge Review Board for an upgrade of his discharge within its 15-year statute of limitations. 10. The applicant provides four letters of support. a. First Sergeant (1SG) (Retired) BRW states, in effect, he was the applicant's 1SG from August 1990 to May 1992. He affirms the applicant performed his duties in an outstanding manner, but did not manage his finances well. Since his separation, the applicant has turned his life around. b. Sergeant First Class (SFC) RLR was an S-1 Noncommissioned-Officer-in-Charge who has known the applicant for more than 31 years. He speaks very highly of the applicant and trusts him without reservation. c. Dr. CZE, Lead Pastor, indicates he has known the applicant for 7 years, and notes he has been a long-standing and dedicated member of his church. The applicant graduated from their leadership college; he is a person of good moral character. d. Mr. JB, President of a mortgage company, essentially states he is the applicant's employer, and he attests to the applicant's professionalism and high level of achievement. REFERENCES: Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel. a. Paragraph 3-7a states that an honorable discharge is given when the quality of the Soldier’s service has generally met standards of acceptable conduct and duty performance. b. Paragraph 3-7b states 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. c. 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 at any time after the charges have been preferred. The request must have included the individual's admission of guilt. A discharge under other than honorable conditions is normally considered appropriate. DISCUSSION: 1. The available evidence shows the applicant was discharged for the good of the service-in lieu of trial by court-martial, under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 10 with an under other than honorable conditions discharge. Discharges under this chapter are based on a voluntary request 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 appear to have been met, and his rights were fully protected throughout the separation process. The characterization of service he received was commensurate with the reason for his discharge. 2. The applicant notes that he was young and immature. Records show the applicant was 21 years of age at the time of his enlistment and 24 when he faced court-martial charges. There is no evidence indicating he was any less mature than other Soldiers of the same age who successfully completed their military service obligation. Additionally, excellent post-service conduct is not normally a basis for upgrading a characterization of service. //NOTHING FOLLOWS// ABCMR Record of Proceedings AR20150000953 Enclosure 1 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20160000654 2 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Enclosure 1 ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20160000654 6 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Enclosure 2