MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION
IN THE CASE OF:
BOARD DATE:
DOCKET NUMBER: AC9708895
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.
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: In effect, that his general discharge, under honorable conditions be upgraded to honorable.
APPLICANT STATES: Because Im a distinguish citizen, and I was a loyal and proud serviceman.
EVIDENCE OF RECORD: The applicant's military records show:
He enlisted in the Regular Army on 18 November 1987.
On 4 August 1990 the applicant willfully destroyed government property. On 6 December 1991 he assaulted a soldier by kicking him in the face with his foot. He was also counseled for poor duty performance, sleeping on duty, failure to follow instructions on several occasions, and failure to report to his appointed place of duty.
During this period he received punishment under Article 15, UCMJ, on two occasions, and extensive counseling.
The applicant underwent a mental evaluation on 11 March 1992 which determined that he could distinguish between right and wrong. Consequently, the applicant was cleared psychiatrically for administrative action deemed necessary by command.
On 12 May 1992 the applicants commander initiated action to separate the applicant from the service under the provisions of AR 635-200, Chapter 14 for misconduct and commission of a serious offense.
The applicant declined counsel and elected not to submit a statement on his own behalf.
On 22 May 1992 the appropriate authority approved the action and directed that he be issued a General Discharge Certificate.
Accordingly, he was discharged on 2 June 1992 under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 14, for misconduct - commission of a serious offense. He was credited with 4 years, 6 months, and 15 days total active service.
The applicant applied to the Army Discharge Review Board and was denied his upgrade request on 25 June 1998 based on a records review. He was advised he may reapply for a personal appearance hearing.
Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basis 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 impractical 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, and it is concluded:
1. The applicants separation under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, Chapter 14, for misconduct and commission of a serious offense, was administratively correct and in conformance with applicable regulations.
2. Careful consideration has been given to the applicants contention. However, the misconduct and commission of a serious offense preferred against him, specifically for assault on another solider was justified and valid.
3. An Honorable discharge is a separation with honor and is appropriate when the quality of the members service generally has met the standards of acceptable conduct and performance of duty for Army personnel. He has not convinced the Board he deserves an honorable characterization of his service.
4. 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.
5. 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
Loren G. Harrell
Director
ARMY | BCMR | CY1997 | 9708895
On 4 August 1990 the applicant willfully destroyed government property. On 12 May 1992 the applicant’s commander initiated action to separate the applicant from the service under the provisions of AR 635-200, Chapter 14 for misconduct and commission of a serious offense. The applicant applied to the Army Discharge Review Board and was denied his upgrade request on 25 June 1998 based on a records review.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | 20110006315
IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 27 October 2011 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20110006315 THE BOARD CONSIDERED THE FOLLOWING EVIDENCE: 1. There is no evidence to show he applied to the Army Discharge Review Board within its established 15-year statute of limitations for a discharge upgrade. The evidence shows the applicant's company commander initiated separation action against him for assault consummated by a battery, an Article 15, and vacation of the Article 15.
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 | CY2010 | 20100013137
The applicant also acknowledged he understood that he would be ineligible to apply for enlistment in the U.S. Army for a period of 2 years after discharge. The applicant's DD Form 214 shows he was discharged on 20 March 1992 under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 14-12c, for misconduct, commission of a serious offense with a general discharge. This regulation also provides, in pertinent part, that prior to discharge or release from active duty, individuals will be...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | 20110001722
The applicant's DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) shows he was issued a general discharge on 5 March 1993, under the provisions of chapter 14-12c, Army Regulation 635-200, due to misconduct commission of a serious offense. There is no evidence in the available records to show he applied to the Army Discharge Review Board for an upgrade of his discharge under that boards 15-year statute of limitations. The evidence of record shows that after testing...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | 20110015930
A memorandum dated 20 May 1993 shows the applicant's commander notified him he was initiating action to separate him under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations - Enlisted Personnel), chapter 14, paragraph 12c by reason of commission of a serious offense. Based on these findings, the board of officers recommended he be discharged with an under other than honorable conditions discharge. The applicant requested a personal appearance before the Commanding General to...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2013 | 20130002000
THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE: 1. The applicant states he found various discrepancies and inaccurate facts and issues in the denial letter (Army Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR) Record of Proceedings) and points out the following: * an incorrect unit was cited * he had a sick slip for quarters, but his chain of command refused to correct the record to show he was not AWOL * he did not receive an assignment he requested * his company commander knew he was...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2012 | 20120005374
On 3 September 1992, the applicant's commander notified him that he was recommending him for separation under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations Enlisted Personnel), for the commission of a serious offense. On 21 October 1992, the separation authority approved the recommendation for discharge under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 14, paragraph 14-12b and c, by reason of pattern of misconduct and commission of a serious offense. Although...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100021605
The applicant requests upgrade of his general discharge to an honorable discharge. He also acknowledged he understood that as a result of the issuance of a discharge under other than honorable conditions, he could be ineligible for many or all benefits as a veteran under both Federal and State laws. On 30 January 1992, the applicants immediate commander initiated separation action against him in accordance with Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 14-12b for a misconduct - pattern of...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100009001
The separation authority directed the applicant be discharged under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 14-12c for misconduct commission of a serious offense with issuance of a General Discharge Certificate. After review of the evidence of this case, it is determined that the applicant has not presented sufficient evidence which warrants changing his general under honorable conditions discharge to fully honorable. _______ _ __X_____ ___ CHAIRPERSON I certify that herein...