BOARD DATE: 8 June 2017 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20160000934 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: 8 June 2017 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20160000934 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: 8 June 2017 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20160000934 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, in effect, that his under other than honorable conditions (UOTHC) discharge be upgraded to an honorable discharge. 2. The applicant states he was just an 18 year-old teenager and not quite ready for military service. He believes he had some mitigating circumstances that lead to his discharge, and that he has made positive changes in his life since being separated from the Army. In effect, he states: a. When he was in basic training, his friend committed suicide by shooting himself while they were qualifying with weapons. He was in the adjacent foxhole and witnessed the whole thing. It really rocked his foundation. He is not making excuses; however, he agrees his discharge was for the good of the service at that time. b. He had many tragedies in his life but he has overcome them all by self-medicating. His brother was shot and murdered and he found his fiancé in a closet after she committed suicide. c. Today, he has been clean and off drugs for over 10 years. He thanks God every day for his recovery. Things in his life are so much better now. Since being discharged from the military he has had two beautiful daughters, received treatment for substance abuse, obtained an Associate's degree, achieved numerous career successes with the Pepsi Cola Corporation, and became an ordained minister. With the love and grace of God, he has been able to give back to the community. d. His father was an Army officer who is buried in Arlington Cemetery and he is very proud of his father. One day, his daughters may entertain joining the Junior Reserve Officers Training Corps (JROTC), and they may ask him about his discharge. He would like his daughters to be proud of him and know that his discharge was upgraded to honorable. e. He would also like to receive the discharge upgrade in order to receive mental-health treatment, group therapy, and classes from the Department of Veterans' Affairs (VA) so that he doesn't relapse or sway away from his recovery. 3. The applicant provides copies of his DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty), for the period ending 19 August 1987, and: * his self-authored statement * three letters of support * a resume * college transcripts * certificates of trainings 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 24 July 1986 at the age of 18. He entered active duty, completed his initial entry training, and was awarded military occupational specialty (MOS) 77F (Petroleum Supply Specialist). 3. A DA Form 2627 (Record of Proceedings Under Article 15, Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ)), dated 11 February 1987, shows the applicant received non-judicial punishment for violating Article 86 of the UCMJ; specifically, for being absent without leave (AWOL) from on or about 11 January 1987 through on or about 10 February 1987. 4. A DD Form 2329 (Record of Trial by Summary Court-Martial), dated 18 June 1987, shows the applicant was found guilty of violating of Article 86 of the UCMJ; specifically, for being AWOL from on or about 9 May 1987 to 5 June 1987. 5. A DD Form 458 (Charge Sheet), dated 8 August 1987, shows court-martial charges were preferred against the applicant for violating: * Article 86 of the UCMJ; specifically, for being AWOL from on or about 1 August 1987 through on or about 7 August 1987 * Article 95 of the UCMJ; specifically, for resisting apprehension on 27 July 1987 * Article 134 of the UCMJ; specifically, for being drunk and disorderly, and failing to pay a taxi debt on 27 July 1987 6. The applicant consulted with legal counsel on 10 August 1987 and was advised of the basis for the contemplated trial by court-martial, the maximum permissible punishment authorized under the UCMJ, the possible effects of an UOTHC discharge, and the procedures and rights that were available to him. Subsequent to receiving this legal counsel, he voluntarily requested discharge 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. 7. In the applicant's request for discharge, he indicated he understood that if his request for discharge was accepted, he may be discharged UOTHC and be furnished an UOTHC Certificate. He indicated he had been advised as to the possible effect of an UOTHC discharge and understood that he may be deprived of many or all Army benefits, that he may be ineligible for many or all benefits administered by the VA, and that he could be deprived of his rights and benefits as a veteran under both Federal and State law. He declined to make a statement in his behalf; however, he did include a statement with his request to the separation authority that stated: * he was sorry for the trouble he caused * when he got money, he would start drinking and couldn't control himself * he gets worried about home and the problems got to him * he promised not to get into any more trouble and to get help as soon as he got home if the discharged was approved 8. The separation authority approved the applicant's request for separation on 11 August 1987, under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, Chapter 10, and directed that he be issued an UOTHC Discharge Certificate. 9. The applicant was discharged from the Army on 19 August 1987. The DD Form 214 he was issued confirms he was discharged under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, Chapter 10, and his character of service was UOTHC. 10. There is no indication the applicant applied to the Army Discharge Review Board (ADRB) for an upgrade of his discharge within its 15-year statute of limitations. 11. The applicant provides: a. letters of support from supervisors and co-workers within his corporate organization(s), attesting to his work habits. b. a copy of his resume that shows his qualifications and skills, professional employment experience, education and special training, and personal attributes. c. college transcripts and certificates of training that shows his continuous learning and drive for self-development to remain competitive for employment. REFERENCES: Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel. 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. 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. 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 UOTHC is normally considered appropriate. DISCUSSION: 1. The applicant enlisted in the Regular Army at 18 years of age. During a brief military career, he received NJP for being AWOL, was found convicted by a summary court-martial and was charged with the commission of three serious offenses punishable under the UCMJ with a punitive discharge. After consulting with counsel, he elected discharge under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 10. 2. Discharges under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 10, are voluntary requests for discharge in lieu of trial by court-martial. 3. The applicant's voluntary request for discharge to avoid trial by court-martial was administratively correct and in conformance with applicable laws and regulations. There is no indication the request was made under coercion or duress. The characterization of service he received was commensurate with the reason for his discharge. 4. With respect to the applicant's age, there is no evidence that indicates he was any less mature than other Soldiers of the same age who successfully completed their periods of military service. 5. The applicant's post-service community contributions and conduct are noted and are commendable; however, post-service conduct alone is not normally a basis for upgrading a discharge. //NOTHING FOLLOWS// ABCMR Record of Proceedings AR20150000953 Enclosure 1 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20150016310 2 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Enclosure 1 ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20160000934 2 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Enclosure 2