APPLICANT REQUESTS: In effect, correction of his military records by showing on his DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) that his rank was specialist four, and that his pay grade was E-4.
APPLICANT STATES: A mistake was made on his DD Form 214 at the time of his discharge.
COUNSEL CONTENDS: Counsel reviewed the case and submitted no additional issues.
EVIDENCE OF RECORD: The applicant's military records show:
On 13 February 1991, the applicant enlisted in the Regular Army, in pay grade E-1. He was advanced to pay grades E-2, E-3, and E-4 effective 13 August 1991, 1 March 1992, and 1 October 1992, respectively.
On 9 August 1993, while serving in pay grade E-4, the applicant received nonjudicial punishment (NJP) under Article 15, Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ), for failure to go at the time prescribed to his appointed place of duty on two occasions. His imposed punishment was reduction to pay grade E-3, a forfeiture of $233 pay (suspended), and 14 days extra duty. He did not appeal. On 18 August 1993, the suspension of the punishment of $233 pay was vacated.
On 26 August 1993, while serving in pay grade E-3, the applicant received NJP under Article 15, UCMJ, for being absent without leave from 0830 hours, 17 August 1993, to on or about 1630 hours, 18 August 1993. His imposed punishment was reduction to pay grade E-2, a forfeiture of $213 pay, 14 days restriction, and 14 days extra duty. His appeal was denied.
On 21 October 1993, the applicant was notified of the proposed action to separate him under Army Regulation
635-200, chapter 14, for patterns of misconduct, and of his
rights. All documents pertaining to the separation action, to include statements signed by the applicant, show his rank as private and his pay grade as E-2.
Orders, dated 9 November 1993, show that the applicant, as a private E-2, was reassigned to the U.S. Army Transition Point for transition processing.
The applicants DD Form 214 indicates that he was discharged, under honorable conditions, as a private E-2, on 18 November 1993 under Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 14-12b, for misconduct. The effective date of his pay grade was shown on the DD Form 214 as 26 August 1993.
There is no evidence in the available records that the applicant was advanced to a higher grade after his reduction to pay grade E-2 on 26 August 1993.
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. 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 this requirement.
2. The evidence of record indicates that the applicant was reduced to pay grade E-2 effective 26 August 1993 as a result of receiving NJP under Article 15, UCMJ, and that he was not advanced to a higher pay grade after that date.
3. The applicant nor counsel has submitted neither probative evidence nor a convincing argument in support of the request.
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 | CY2009 | 20090004328
The applicant requests, in effect, that his general, under honorable conditions discharge be upgraded to an honorable discharge. On 8 May 1992, the applicant's company commander recommended he be separated from the service under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 14-12c, with a general, under honorable conditions discharge. On 24 July 1992, the applicant was accordingly discharged from active duty, in pay grade E-1, under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200,...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100012152
e. The applicant acknowledged he understood that if he received a discharge certificate/character of service which was less than honorable, he could make application to the Army Discharge Review Board (ADRB) or the ABCMR for upgrading; however, an act of consideration by either board did not imply that his discharge would be upgraded. In addition, he acknowledged with his signature that he understood that if he received a discharge certificate/ character of service which was less than...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140013342
He also requests correction of item 12h (Effective Date of Pay Grade) of his DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) to show that he held the rank/pay grade of private (PV2)/E-2 with an effective date of 26 September 1991 at the time of discharge. On 25 May 1993, the applicant was notified by his unit commander that separation action was being initiated against him under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations - Enlisted Personnel),...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002067625C070402
EVIDENCE OF RECORD : The applicant's military records show: The chain of command did not accept his conditional waiver and the applicant appeared before an administrative separation board, represented by counsel, on 16 July 1992, at 0930 hours. The administrative separation board which considered the applicant’s case and recommended his discharge, was properly convened and functioned in compliance with pertinent regulations.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100021885
The applicant requests correction of his DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) as follows: * Items 4a (Grade, Rate, or Rank) and 4b (Pay Grade) to show his rank/grade as private (PV2)/E-2 * Item 12f (Foreign Service) to show his service in Southwest Asia 2. Army Regulation 600-8-22 (Military Awards) states: a. Additionally, most personnel documents in his service records show he served as a PVT or PV1/E-1 throughout his military service.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080017825
The attorney recommended the applicant be separated from the service with a general discharge and a characterization of service as under other than honorable conditions. On 30 December 1992, 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 an under other than honorable conditions characterization of service. A discharge under other than honorable conditions was...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080003869
On 18 February 1992, the applicant submitted a statement stating that he desired to be retained on active duty and that if the chain of command determined to discharge him, he requests an honorable discharge. On 19 February 1992, the separation authority approved the applicants discharge under the provisions of chapter 14 of Army Regulation 635-200 by reason of patterns of misconduct, and directed the applicant be furnished a General Discharge Certificate. His discharge was appropriate...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2012 | 20120004644
Application for correction of military records (with supporting documents provided, if any). Chapter 2 contains guidance on the preparation of the DD Form 214 and states that items 4a and 4b show the active duty grade or rank and pay grade at time of separation and are obtained from the Soldier's records (promotion or reduction orders). There is no evidence in his records and he provides none to show he was promoted back to the rank/grade of PFC/E-3 between the date of his reduction and...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080014231
At the time, an undesirable discharge was normally appropriate for a Soldier discharged for misconduct; however, the separation authority could direct that a general discharge be issued if the individual had been awarded a personal decoration or if warranted by the particular circumstances in his or her case. The applicant failed to provide evidence which proves by a preponderance of the evidence that his discharge was rendered unjustly, in error, or that there were mitigating circumstances...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2007 | 20070013878
The evidence of record shows that on 6 March 1992, the applicants unit commander notified him he was recommending that he be discharged from the Army under the provision of Army Regulation 635-200, Chapter 14. There is no evidence the applicant applied to the Army Discharge Review Board for an upgrade of his discharge within its 15-year statute of limitations. Therefore, the Board determined that the overall merits of this case are insufficient as a basis for correction of the records of...