APPLICANT REQUESTS: In effect, that his general discharge (GD) under honorable conditions be upgraded to honorable.
APPLICANT STATES: In effect, that he served honorably and his discharge should have been honorable.
EVIDENCE OF RECORD: The applicant's military records show:
On 17 February 1987 he enlisted in the Regular Army for a period of 4 years, a cash bonus, airborne training, and military occupational specialty (MOS) training as a 13E
(Cannon Fire Direction Specialist).
He successfully completed One Station Unit Training at Fort Sill, Oklahoma and basic airborne training at Fort Benning, Georgia at which time he was awarded MOS 13E and an additional skill identifier (ASI) as a parachutist (P).
Upon his graduation from the basic airborne course he was awarded the parachutist badge and sent to Fort Bragg,
North Carolina for his first permanent duty assignment.
On 16 June 1988 the applicant accepted a battery level non judicial punishment (NJP) under the provisions of
Article 15 of the UCMJ. The NJP contained two specifications, the first for violation of Article 92 (violating a lawful general regulation) and the second for violation of Article 107 (making a false official statement with the intent to deceive). His punishment for these offenses included reduction to the rank of private/E-2 and a forfeiture of $175.00 for one month.
On 5 July 1988 the applicant was barred from reenlistment by his unit commander based on the NJP he accepted on
16 June 1988.
On 30 September 1988 the applicant accepted a field grade NJP for violation of Article 112a (wrongful use of marijuana). His punishment included reduction to the rank of private/E-1, forfeiture of $335.00 per month for two months, 45 days of extra duty, and 45 days of restriction.
The applicant was notified by his commanding officer (CO) of his intent to separate him, under the provisions of paragraph 14-12c, AR 635-200 for misconduct, commission of a serious offense. His CO indicated he would recommend the applicant receive a GD. The applicant acknowledged receipt of the CO's intent with his signature.
On 16 November 1988 the applicant authenticated a statement with his signature which indicated that while in consultation with counsel he was advised of his legal rights, declined representation by counsel, and declined to submit statements on his own behalf.
On 16 November 1988 the applicant's CO initiated the separation action and recommended a characterization of service of under honorable conditions with issuance of a General Discharge Certificate and the intermediate level commander recommended approval of the action and concurred in the recommended characterization of service.
On 17 November 1988 the appropriate approval authority approved the separation action and directed the applicant be discharged and furnished a General Discharge Certificate. Accordingly, on 25 November 1988 the applicant was discharged after completing 1 year, 9 months, and 9 days of active military service.
On 25 June 1997 the Army Discharge Review Board denied the applicant's request for an upgrade to his discharge.
Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel. Chapter 14 establishes policy and prescribes procedure for separating members for misconduct. Specific categories include minor disciplinary infractions, a pattern of misconduct, commission of a serious offense, convictions by civil authorities, desertion or absence without leave.
DISCUSSION: Considering all the evidence, allegations, and information presented by the applicant, together with the evidence of record, and applicable law and regulations, it is concluded:
1. The discharge proceedings were conducted in accordance with law and regulation applicable at the time. The reason for and the character of the discharge are commensurate with the applicant's overall record of military service.
2. The type of discharge directed and the reasons therefore were appropriate considering all the facts of the case.
3. 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.
4. 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
ARMY | BCMR | CY2012 | 20120017254
Application for correction of military records (with supporting documents provided, if any). He is now 45 years of age and needs his discharge upgraded. On 8 April 1988, the applicants commander recommended separation from the service under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 14, for a pattern of misconduct.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2004 | 2004101471C070208
On the date of the applicant's discharge, he had completed 6 years, 3 months, and 2 days active military service, with 252 days excess leave. Contrary to the applicant's contentions that this was the only occurrence in 6 years of dedicated service, the evidence of record shows that he received non-judicial punishment twice. The evidence of record failed to establish a basis upon which clemency could be granted and upon which the severity of the sentence imposed could be moderated with an...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100028265
On 30 January 1967, the applicant's immediate commander initiated a Certificate of Unsuitability for Enlistment/Reenlistment against the applicant. The Army must find that a service member is physically unfit to reasonably perform his or her duties and assign an appropriate disability rating before he or she can be medically retired or separated. The Army must find that a service member is physically unfit to reasonably perform his or her duties and assign an appropriate disability rating...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080017443
On 2 March 1989, the separation authority approved the applicants discharge, under the provisions of chapter 14 of AR 635-200 by reason of misconduct, and directed the applicant be furnished a General Discharge Certificate. The evidence of record shows that the applicants discharge was appropriate because the quality of his service was not consistent with the Army standards of acceptable personal conduct and performance of duty by military personnel. _______ _XXX _______...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080019081
In his statement in his own behalf, the applicant essentially stated that he had done a lot of wrong for which he was very sorry, that he never did drugs as a civilian, but that he started using drugs a few months after being with his unit. The applicant contends that his general discharge should be upgraded to an honorable discharge. It also shows that he was discharged for the abuse of illegal drugs, which is a serious offense, and the applicant failed to provide evidence which shows...
ARMY | DRB | CY1997 | 199703237
Action requested: ( X ) Recharacterization ( ) Change of Reason PART III - SERVICE HISTORYSECTION A - Period of Service Under Review 1. CASE NO: AD97-03237 PART III - SERVICE HISTORYSECTION A - Period of Service Under Review - Continued 5. 881215: Applicant was discharged.2.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090006850
Army Regulation 635-200, 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. While the applicants service does not merit a fully honorable discharge, given his age and immaturity, the minor nature of his NJP offenses, and the circumstances of his 13-day period of AWOL, it would be...
ARMY | BCMR | CY1997 | 9711410
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. In accordance with Army Regulation 15-185, the application and the available military records pertinent to the corrective action requested were reviewed to determine whether to authorize a formal hearing, recommend that the records be corrected without a formal hearing, or to deny the application without a formal hearing if it is...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090014748
Application for correction of military records (with supporting documents provided, if any). The applicant requests, in effect, an upgrade of his general discharge (GD), under honorable conditions to an honorable discharge (HD). There is no evidence in the available record that shows the applicant petitioned the Army Discharge Review Board (ADRB) for an upgrade of his discharge within that board's 15-year statute of limitations.
ARMY | BCMR | CY1997 | 9711409
In accordance with Army Regulation 15-185, the application and the available military records pertinent to the corrective action requested were reviewed to determine whether to authorize a formal hearing, recommend that the records be corrected without a formal hearing, or to deny the application without a formal hearing if it is determined that insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate the existence of probable material error or injustice. The applicant requests...