APPLICANT REQUESTS: That his general discharge be upgraded to honorable.
APPLICANT STATES: In effect, that he cannot find out why he was chaptered out of the service. Based on the character and type of discharge on his DD Form 214, he cannot find a job. He needs the Montgomery GI Bill to afford to stay in school to become a military lawyer.
EVIDENCE OF RECORD: The applicant's military records show:
The applicant enlisted and entered on active duty on
15 October 1992. He completed basic, advanced individual training, and field artillery training.
He received counseling on 12 occasions for offenses of no hair cut, unshined shoes, indebtedness, writing a check without sufficient funds, AWOL, disorderly, failure to repair, i.e., uniform appearance and PT formation.
The applicant received nonjudicial punishment (NJP) under Article 15 UCMJ on 4 occasions for offenses of AWOL, failure to pay debts, failure to return from leave and failure to report to place of duty.
He was barred from reenlistment on 15 February 1994 for financial mismanagement, failure to follow instructions, missing formation and appearance of uniform.
On 16 June 1995 the applicant was notified of recommended separation with a general discharge due to misconduct. He elected to consult with counsel, but did not submit a statement in his behalf.
The separation authority waived any further rehabilitative efforts, approved the recommendation and directed that a General discharge Certificate be issued. On 4 October 1995 the applicant was separated under the provisions of Army regulation 635-200, chapter 14. He had 2 years 11 months and 20 days of creditable service.
Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel. Chapter 14 establishes policy and prescribes procedures 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. Action will be taken to separate a member for misconduct when it is clearly established that rehabilitation is impracticable or is unlikely to succeed.
DISCUSSION: Considering all the evidence, allegations, and information presented by the applicant, together with the evidence of record, applicable law and regulations, it is concluded:
1. The allegations provided by the applicant that he does not know why he was chaptered out, is unsupported by the evidence of record. There is no provision in law or regulation that requires upgrading of a properly issued discharge.
2. The applicants administrative separation was accomplished in compliance with applicable regulations with no indication of procedural errors which would tend to jeopardize his rights. 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 applicants 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 | CY1996 | 9607036C070209
The separation authority waived any further rehabilitative efforts, approved the recommendation and directed that a General discharge Certificate be issued. On 4 October 1995 the applicant was separated under the provisions of Army regulation 635-200, chapter 14. The applicant has failed to submit evidence that would satisfy the aforementioned requirement.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140014444
The applicant requests his general under honorable conditions discharge be upgraded to an honorable discharge. He acknowledged he understood that if he received a discharge/character of service which is less than honorable, he may make application to the Army Discharge Review Board (ADRB) or this Board for upgrading. Although an under other than honorable conditions discharge is normally considered appropriate for the authority and reason for his discharge, it appears the separation...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2003 | 2003087164C070212
On 23 December 2001, the applicant applied to the Army Discharge Review Board (ADRB) for an upgrade of his discharge to honorable and to change the reason for his discharge to Secretarial Authority. The applicant's narrative reason for separation is correct and was applied in accordance with the applicable regulations. The evidence of record shows the applicant received several adverse counseling statements, one Article 15, and 14 days of lost time.
ARMY | DRB | CY2011 | AR20110024464
Applicant Name: ????? "Pattern of misconduct" for medical issues? Legal Basis for Separation: Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140001364
On 13 December 1996, the applicant's immediate commander initiated separation action against the applicant in accordance with paragraph 14-12b of Army Regulation 635-200 for a pattern of misconduct. There is no indication the applicant petitioned the Army Discharge Review Board for an upgrade of her discharge within that board's 15-year statute of limitations. The applicant provides evidence to show she is currently an NCO in good standing in the U.S. Army Reserve (USAR).
ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | 20110022594
16 February 1995, 21 February 1995, and 24 March 1995 for missing formation; c. 17 February 1995, for failure to shave on three occasions; d. 8 March 1995, for disobeying a lawful order by leaving a live fire exercise; e. 6 April 1995, for not reporting to his place of duty; f. 9 May 1995, for failure to show up at work call; g. 10 July 1995 and 10 August 1995, for writing bad checks; h. 14 July 1995, for dereliction of duty; and i. On 7 November 1995, the applicant was notified of...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140009843
The applicant requests his general discharge (GD) be upgraded to an honorable discharge (HD). On 9 September 1989, the applicant's command initiated separation action under Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations Enlisted Personnel), chapter 14, for acts or a pattern of misconduct. On 23 October 1989, the applicant was discharged under Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 14-12d with a GD.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2012 | 20120012385
Application for correction of military records (with supporting documents provided, if any). On 23 January 1995, the unit commander notified the applicant that action was being taken to initiate the applicants separation under the provisions of chapter 13, Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations), by reason of unsatisfactory performance and that it was being recommended the applicant receive a GD. Absent a request from the member no board automatically conducts a hearing or upgrade...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2007 | 20070008149
The applicant was counseled again on 21 March 1994, for failure to pay his debts. He was informed that if his behavior continued, action to separate him from the Army under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 14, would be initiated. On 20 December 1994, the appropriate authority approved the recommendation for discharge and he directed that the applicant be discharged under other than honorable conditions, under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 14, for...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | 20110023045
The applicant requests an upgrade of his general discharge to an honorable discharge. There is no indication that the applicant applied to the Army Discharge Review Board for an upgrade of his discharge within that board's 15-year statute of limitations. A discharge under other than honorable conditions is normally appropriate for a Soldier discharged under this chapter.