Search Decisions

Decision Text

ARMY | BCMR | CY1997 | 199711205C070209
Original file (199711205C070209.TXT) Auto-classification: Denied
MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION


	IN THE CASE OF:   
	


	BOARD DATE:        10 December 1998      
	DOCKET NUMBER: AC97-11205  
                      AR1998012607

	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.


Member

	The Board, established pursuant to authority contained in 10 U.S.C. 1552, convened at the call of the Chairperson on the above date.  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 correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein.

	The Board considered the following evidence:

	Exhibit A - Application for correction of military 
                records
	Exhibit B - Military Personnel Records (including
	            advisory opinion, if any)

APPLICANT REQUESTS:  That his general discharge be changed to honorable and that the reason for his discharge be changed to hardship.  

APPLICANT STATES:  He was informed by an NCO that after two years his discharge would automatically be upgraded.  He feels that he was lied to, and wants his discharge upgraded.

EVIDENCE OF RECORD:  The applicant's military records show:

The applicant enlisted in the Army Reserve on 10 April 1985 and completed training in August of 1986.  On 8 March 1988 he enlisted in the Regular Army for four years.  In June of 1988 he was assigned to an air defense artillery unit in Germany.  He was promoted to E-3 on 9 November 1988, and reduced to pay grade E-2 on 16 August 1989.

In a 3 November 1988 mental health evaluation, the examining psychiatrist stated that the applicant had an adjustment disorder with depressed mood and a personality disorder not otherwise specified with antisocial and schizoid traits.  The applicant was not a danger to himself or others, his condition was improved, and his prognosis fair.  He did not have a condition requiring medical board evaluation and was qualified for world wide assignment.  

The applicant’s records contain numerous counseling statements, for AWOL, for failure to return to duty, for failure to clean up his room, for indebtedness, for attempted suicide, and for personal hygiene and general appearance.

A 15 December 1988 report of investigation indicates that the applicant attempted suicide on three occasions on 23 October 1988, twice by jumping from an overpass, and once by stabbing himself in the chest.  He was taken to the Wiesbaden (Germany) Medical Center and admitted to the mental health clinic.

A 1 November 1989 report of medical examination indicates that the applicant was medically qualified for separation with a physical profile of 1 1 1 1 1 1.  In the report of medical history he furnished for the examination, the applicant stated that he was in good health and not taking any medication at that time.

On 17 November 1989 the applicant’s commanding officer notified the applicant that he was recommending that the applicant be separated from the Army for unsatisfactory performance.  The applicant consulted with counsel, stated that he understood the basis for the contemplated action, its effects, and the rights available to him.  He declined to submit a statement in his own behalf.


On 20 November 1989 the applicant’s commanding officer recommended that the applicant be separated from the Army with a general discharge because of unsatisfactory performance.  That official stated that the applicant had received numerous counseling statements regarding his duties and conduct; however, continued to perform at a substandard level. l

On 20 November 1989 the separation authority approved the recommendation and directed that the applicant receive a general discharge.  The applicant was released from active duty on 25 January 1990 for unsatisfactory performance.  He had1 year, 10 months, and 18 days of service.

On 13 February 1995 the Army Discharge Review Board, in an unanimous opinion, denied the applicant’s request to upgrade his discharge.

Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel.  Chapter 13 contains the policy and outlines the procedures for separating individuals for unsatisfactory performance, and provides, in pertinent part, that commanders will separate a member under this chapter when, in the commander's judgment, the member will not develop sufficiently to participate satisfactorily in further training and/or become a satisfactory soldier. 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 his rights. The character of the discharge is commensurate with his overall record.

2.  The applicant has submitted neither probative evidence nor a convincing argument in support of his 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 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

__jhl____  ___jma__  ___sk___  DENY APPLICATION




						Loren G. Harrell
						Director



INDEX

CASE ID
AC
SUFFIX

RECON
YYYYMMDD
DATE BOARDED
YYYYMMDD
TYPE OF DISCHARGE
(HD, GD, UOTHC, UD, BCD, DD)
DATE OF DISCHARGE
YYYYMMDD
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY
AR .  .  .  .  .  
DISCHARGE REASON

BOARD DECISION
(NC, GRANT , DENY, GRANT PLUS)
REVIEW AUTHORITY

ISSUES         1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.


Similar Decisions

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY1997 | 199711205

    Original file (199711205.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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. On 13 February 1995 the...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY1995 | 9511136C070209

    Original file (9511136C070209.TXT) Auto-classification: Denied

    APPLICANT STATES: She was discharged through administrative channels, and the Army Discharge Review Board agrees that if her condition had been properly diagnosed, she would have received a physical disability retirement or separation. That official stated that the applicant had received extensive mental health care during her active duty service, and that her difficulties were attributed to adjustment disorders and various combinations of personality features and personality disorder, that...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140013450

    Original file (20140013450.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant states: * he was wrongfully discharged from the Army after he became disabled in the line of duty when he developed a psychiatric disorder after witnessing a traumatic event * after returning home early from a field maneuver, the traumatic event he experienced was witnessing his wife of 2 months engage in an extra-marital affair with a fellow Soldier on 23 April 1987 * he moved into the barracks on 24 April 1987 * on 25 April 1987, he was admitted to Womack Army Community...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2001 | 2001057266C070420

    Original file (2001057266C070420.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    APPLICANT STATES : That his records show that he did have a disability and that he should have been medically discharged. A medical report prepared at the Army hospital at Fort Leonard Wood, Missouri, shows that the applicant was admitted to the hospital on 14 January 1988 after being examined for possible medical board evaluation because of complaints of neck and back pain since 14 June 1987 [the date of the automobile accident]. On 6 July 1993 the applicant was discharged from the Army Reserve.

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2003 | 2003086462C070212

    Original file (2003086462C070212.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 19 July 2002 the applicant requested that the Army Discharge Review Board change the reason for his discharge from personality disorder to physical disability retirement or separation, citing the evidence contained in the above mentioned psychologist's evaluation report and the Department of Veterans Affairs disability rating. The Army must find unfitness for duty at the time of separation before a member may be medically retired or separated. Consequently, due to the two concepts...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2013 | 20130004952

    Original file (20130004952.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 11 May 1989, his commander informed the applicant he was initiating action to separate him for unsatisfactory performance under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations - Enlisted Personnel), paragraph 13-2. There is no evidence showing the applicant applied to the Army Discharge Review Board for an upgrade of his discharge within that board's 15-year statute of limitations. The NJP he received and counseling records clearly show his service did not meet the...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100025917

    Original file (20100025917.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    She completed training as a medical specialist and was transferred to Fort Devens, Massachusetts, for assignment to a combat support hospital. On 17 April 1989, the applicant's commander notified her that he was initiating action to discharge her from the service under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 5-13, due to a diagnosed personality disorder. Personnel discharged by reason of a personality disorder under the provisions of paragraph 5-13 are issued a separation code...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2004 | 20040010683C070208

    Original file (20040010683C070208.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 5 October 1988, the applicant’s commander recommended his separation from the service under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, Chapter 9, for alcohol abuse. On 1 November 1988, the applicant was discharged for alcohol abuse as a rehabilitation failure. Records show the applicant should have discovered the alleged error or injustice now under consideration on 1 November 1988; therefore, the time for the applicant to file a request for correction of any error or injustice expired...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | 20110011085

    Original file (20110011085.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Counsel requests reconsideration of the applicant's request to change his administrative discharge for personality disorder to medical disability due to post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD). He enlisted in the USAR again in March 2003. The psychologist noted the applicant displayed "no enduring pattern of behavior indicative of a personality disorder" while in the USAR from 1988 to 2004. c. The psychologist observed that "after exposure to traumatic events in Iraq, the clear symptomology...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2012 | 20120007157

    Original file (20120007157.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant states, in effect, his characterization of service and narrative reason for separation diminishes his character as a person and former service member. His record contains a DA Form 3647 (Inpatient Record Cover Sheet), dated 17 September 1987. Accordingly, his chain of command initiated separation action against him in accordance with Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 13, by reason of unsatisfactory performance and directed he received a general under honorable conditions discharge.