APPLICANT REQUESTS: In effect, that her general discharge be upgraded to honorable.
APPLICANT STATES: She states that she should have received an honorable discharge instead of a general discharge.
EVIDENCE OF RECORD: The applicant's military records show:
The applicant enlisted in the Army on 1 November 1988, with 2 months and 18 days of prior active service. On
14 November she was assigned to a support unit in Germany.
On 19 April 1989 the applicant received nonjudicial punishment under Article 15, UCMJ, for disrespect and for disobeying lawful orders.
On 27 April 1990 the applicant received nonjudicial punishment for absenting herself from her place of duty.
On 14 June 1990 the applicant was barred from reenlisting.
On 10 July 1990 the applicant received nonjudicial punishment for violating a lawful general regulation by wrongfully possessing and using two ration cards.
On 25 July 1990 the applicants commanding officer recommended that the applicant be eliminated from the Army under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 13, for unsatisfactory duty performance. That official stated that the applicant had received nonjudicial punishment on three occasions, and had been counseled on numerous occasions for matters such as having alcoholic beverages in her wall locker, for being late for formation, and for not maintaining her living area up to standards.
The applicant consulted with counsel and stated that she was aware of the basis for the contemplated action, its effects, and the rights available to her. She stated that she understood the nature and consequences of the general discharge that she might receive.
On 6 August 1990 the separation authority approved the recommendation and directed that she receive a general discharge. The applicant was discharged on
13 September 1990 under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200 for unsatisfactory performance. She had 1 year, 9 months, and 13 days of service during her latest period of service.
On 13 January 1993, in an unanimous opinion, the Army Discharge Review Board denied the applicants request to upgrade her discharge.
On 25 March 1994 the applicant and her counsel appeared before the Army Discharge Review Board and appealed its decision. Her appeal was denied.
Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel. Chapter 13 establishes policy and prescribes procedures for separating members for unsatisfactory performance. That chapter states, in part, that commanders will separate a soldier for unsatisfactory performance, when it is clearly established that in the commanders judgment, the soldier will not develop sufficiently to participate satisfactorily in further training and/or become a satisfactory soldier, or the ability of the soldier to perform duties effectively in the future, including potential for advancement or leadership, is unlikely. The service of soldiers separated because of unsatisfactory performance will be characterized as honorable or under honorable conditions as warranted by their military record.
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's administrative separation was accomplished in compliance with applicable regulations with no indication of procedural errors which would tend to jeopardize her rights. The character of her discharge is commensurate with her overall record.
2. The applicant has submitted neither probative evidence nor a convincing argument in support of her request.
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 | CY2008 | 20080018597
29 June 1990 for failure to be at her appointed place of duty; k. 1 July 1990 for having a poor attitude; l. 6 August 1990 for failure to be in the proper duty uniform and for failing to be at her appointed place of duty; m. 7 September 1990 for failure to be at her appointed place of duty; and n. 11 September 1990 for disobeying a lawful order from an NCO and being derelict in the performance of duties. The applicant signed a statement indicating that she was advised she was being...
ARMY | BCMR | CY1995 | 9511651C070209
On 7 September 1994, the commander notified the applicant that she was being recommended for discharge under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 13, for unsatisfactory performance. On 4 October 1994, the applicant was discharged in pay grade E-1 under the provisions of Army Regulations 635-200, chapter 13, for unsatisfactory performance with a general discharge. DISCUSSION: Considering all the evidence, allegations, and information presented by the applicant, together with...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | 20110016556
THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE: 1. There is no evidence in the available record showing that she received counseling while she was in the Army because she was suicidal. The applicant received a general discharge based on her overall record of service.
ARMY | BCMR | CY1996 | 9610983C070209
On 29 March 1989, she entered the Delayed Entry Program and on 30 March 1989 she enlisted as Joyce Ann Summers in the Regular Army for 6 years. On 10 April 1991, new separation orders were published authorizing her an overseas separation. NOTE: As the evidence of record indicates the applicant was separated from the service under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, Chapter 13, for unsatisfactory performance with a general discharge, the Army Review Boards Agency, Support Division,...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2001 | 2001055122C070420
The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein. She applied to this Board on 6 June 2000 requesting that the Board change her discharge to reflect a more favorable narrative reason and authority for discharge. However, they are not supported by the evidence of record or the evidence submitted by the applicant with her application.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002078319C070215
On 20 November 1991, the applicant's commander submitted a DA Form 4187 (Personnel Action) recommending the applicant be separated under the provisions of chapter 13, Army Regulation 635-200, due to the failure of two consecutive APFT's on 30 October and 15 November 1991. The DD Form 214 shows no lost time.Pertinent Army regulations (AR) provide that prior to discharge or release from active duty, individuals will be assigned RE codes based on their service records or the reason for...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2015 | 20150001875
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. On 27 June 1990, following a legal review and consistent with the chain of command's recommendations, the separation authority approved the applicants discharge under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200 by reason of unsatisfactory...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2012 | 20120018760
THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE: 1. On 19 May 1983, she was notified by her immediate commander that discharge action was being initiated against her under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations - Enlisted Separations), chapter 13 for unsatisfactory performance. There is no indication she applied to the Army Discharge Review Board for an upgrade of her discharge within that board's 15-year statute of limitations.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2001 | 2001055498C070420
The applicant requests that her Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty, DD From 214, be corrected to show her rank and grade as Private, E-2 (PV2), her date of separation as 7 February 2001, her net active service as 1 year, 2 months, and 18 days of service, and that she was a high school graduate or equivalent. In December 2000, the applicant accepted nonjudicial punishment under Article 15, Uniform Code of Military Justice for failing to go to her appointed place of duty. ...
ARMY | BCMR | CY1996 | 9611208C070209
She was counseled on 16 July for her unsatisfactory duty performance. On 30 July 1991 the applicants commanding officer initiated action to separate the applicant for unsatisfactory performance under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 13. The service of soldiers separated because of unsatisfactory performance will be characterized as honorable or under honorable conditions as warranted by their military record.