Search Decisions

Decision Text

ARMY | BCMR | CY1996 | 9606344C070209
Original file (9606344C070209.TXT) Auto-classification: Denied
APPLICANT REQUESTS:  In effect, the applicant requests reconsideration of the Board’s decision that denied his request to upgrade his under other than honorable conditions discharge to honorable. 

APPLICANT STATES:  That he realizes he made a mistake and is responsible for his actions, however, he’s been punished.  At the time of his action he was advised by legal counsel to request an other than honorable discharge.  He wanted to stay in the Army, but was told that his career was over and to try to upgrade his discharge after his separation.  He’s a family man and works hard.  He’s not in trouble with the law and he is sorry for what he did.  He wants a personal appearance before a board if at all possible.   

NEW EVIDENCE OR INFORMATION:  Incorporated herein is a summarization of the applicant’s military records prepared to reflect the Board’s original consideration of his case on 29 January 1997.

DISCUSSION:  Considering all the evidence, allegations, and information presented by the applicant, together with the evidence of record, applicable law and regulations, and advisory opinion(s), it is concluded:

1.  The applicant has provided neither probative evidence nor a convincing argument in support of his request.  While the Board has taken cognizance of the applicant’s contrition and his good post-service conduct, neither of these factors, either individually or in sum, warrant the relief requested.

2.  In order to justify correction of a military record the applicant must show to the satisfaction of the Board, or it must otherwise satisfactorily appear, that the record is in error or unjust.  The applicant has failed to submit evidence that would satisfy the aforementioned requirement.

3.  In view of the foregoing, there is no basis for granting the applicant’s request.
  

DETERMINATION:  The applicant has failed to submit sufficient relevant evidence to demonstrate the existence of probable error or injustice.

BOARD VOTE:

                       GRANT          

                       GRANT FORMAL HEARING

                       DENY APPLICATION




						Karl F. Schneider
						Acting Director

Similar Decisions

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2003 | 2003088354C070403

    Original file (2003088354C070403.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    I certify that hereinafter is recorded the record of consideration of the Army Board for Correction of Military Records in the case of the above-named individual. Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 3-7, provides that an honorable discharge is a separation with honor and entitles the recipient to benefits provided by law. The Board reviewed the available records which included two nonjudicial punishments and a notification of dishonored checks in the amount of $1,226.53 and determined that...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY1997 | 9708424C070209

    Original file (9708424C070209.TXT) Auto-classification: Denied

    APPLICANT REQUESTS: In effect, the applicant requests that his uncharacterized discharge for entry level status performance and conduct be upgraded to honorable. That official stated that he was initiating action to discharge the applicant from the Army. The applicant consulted with counsel, and stated that he understood that if the discharge was approved he would receive an entry level separation with uncharacterized service.

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2003 | 2003084965C070212

    Original file (2003084965C070212.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein. APPLICANT REQUESTS: That his undesirable discharge be upgraded to a general discharge. He states his request was denied and he was told to request leave after arriving in Germany.

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY1997 | 9708424

    Original file (9708424.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    APPLICANT REQUESTS : In effect, the applicant requests that his uncharacterized discharge for entry level status performance and conduct be upgraded to honorable. That official stated that he was initiating action to discharge the applicant from the Army. The applicant consulted with counsel, and stated that he understood that if the discharge was approved he would receive an entry level separation with uncharacterized service.

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY1996 | 9611236C070209

    Original file (9611236C070209.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    In his memorandum concerning this action, that official indicated that the applicant had approached him (his commanding officer) on 17 November 1993, on the day of his physical training test, stated he was having marital problems and wanted to know if he could be barred from reenlisting so that he (the applicant) could request discharge. The applicant’s commanding officer then recommended to the separation authority that the applicant be separated for unsatisfactory performance, citing his...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY1995 | 9511150C070209

    Original file (9511150C070209.TXT) Auto-classification: Denied

    The examining psychiatrist stated that the applicant could not be an effective soldier and recommended that he be administratively separated. On 10 January 1969 the separation authority approved the request for discharge and directed that the applicant receive an Undesirable Discharge Certificate. The character of the discharge is commensurate with the applicant’s overall record of military service.

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2003 | 2003089591C070403

    Original file (2003089591C070403.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein. APPLICANT STATES : In effect, that he was an alcoholic at the time of his military service and has been sober for 20 years. Army Regulation 635-208, in effect at the time, provided the authority for discharging enlisted personnel for unfitness.

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090017504

    Original file (20090017504.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant states he chose to get out. COUNSEL'S REQUEST, STATEMENT AND EVIDENCE: Counsel offers nothing beyond that submitted by the applicant and “rest this case on the evidence of record.” CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE: 1. His records contain numerous counseling statements regarding his indebtedness.

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100009006

    Original file (20100009006.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 16 November 1989, he was advised by his company commander of action being initiated to separate him from the service under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations–Enlisted Separation), paragraph 14-12b, with a general discharge, for misconduct-pattern of misconduct. On 24 November 1989, he was separated in pay grade E-2 under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 14-12b, for misconduct-pattern of misconduct with a general discharge. There is no...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002067676C070402

    Original file (2002067676C070402.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein. He was discharged on 1 August 1980 under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 14, for frequent incidents of a discreditable nature with civil or military authorities, in pay grade E-1. On 5 February 1981, the Army Discharge Review Board denied his request for an upgrade of his discharge.