MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION
IN THE CASE OF:
BOARD DATE: 9 December 1998
DOCKET NUMBER: AC97-09457
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 applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein.
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 upgraded to an honorable discharge.
APPLICANT STATES: He was young and immature but he doesnt feel that he deserved the type of discharge he received. He contends that contrary to the Armys contention that he could not adapt to military life, this was not a good reason to discharge him from the service. However, he does regret his actions and realizes the mistakes he made.
EVIDENCE OF RECORD: The applicant's military records show:
The applicant enlisted on 3 May 1974 for a period of 2 years. He successfully completed his training and was transferred to Germany on 12 September 1974 for duty as a track vehicle mechanic.
On 10 February 1975 nonjudicial punishment was imposed against the applicant for failure to go to his place of duty. His punishment consisted of a forfeiture of pay and extra duty.
The facts and circumstances surrounding the applicants discharge are not present in the available records. However, his records show that he was discharged under honorable conditions on 9 August 1975 under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 5-37. He had served 1 year, 3 months, and 7 days of total active service.
The applicant applied to the Army Discharge Review Board for an upgrade of his discharge on 20 November 1996. However, because he failed to file within that boards 15-year statute of limitations, this Board accepted his application in lieu of a DD Form 149.
The Department of the Army began testing the Expeditious Discharge Program (EDP) in October 1973. In a message dated 8 November 1974 the Deputy Chief of Staff for Personnel announced the expansion of the EDP. The program provided for the separation of soldiers who acceptability, performance of duty, and/or potential for continued effective service fall below the standards required for retention in the Army. Soldiers may be separated under this program when subjective evaluation of their commanders identifies them as lacking qualities for continued military service because of attitude, motivation, self-discipline, inability to adapt socially or emotionally, or failure to demonstrate promotion potential.
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. In the absence of evidence to the contrary, it must be presumed that the applicants administrative discharge was accomplished in accordance with applicable regulations with no violations of the applicants rights.
2. It must also be presumed that the applicants discharge and the reasons therefor were appropriate under the circumstances.
3. The applicant has failed to show through the evidence submitted and the evidence of record that his discharge is in error or unjust.
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
___jh ___ __fe ____ __tbr____ DENY APPLICATION
Loren G. Harrell
Director
ARMY | BCMR | CY1997 | 9709457
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...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002075644C070403
The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein. Otherwise, a commander was required to separate soldiers under other provisions of the regulation which in most cases resulted in an other than honorable discharge. The applicant has failed to submit evidence that would satisfy this requirement.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2001 | 2001056531C070420
The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein. On the same day, the commander notified the applicant that he was initiating action to separate her from the service under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 5-37, under the Expeditious Discharge Program (EDP). Otherwise, a commander was required to separate soldiers under other provisions of the regulation which in most cases resulted in an other than...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2003 | 2003084007C070212
The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein. On 16 September 1975, the applicant was discharged, with a general discharge under honorable conditions, in pay grade E-2, under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 5, the EDP. 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:
ARMY | BCMR | CY2001 | 2001062430C070421
The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein. APPLICANT REQUESTS: That his General discharge be upgraded to an Honorable discharge. Otherwise, a commander was required to separate soldiers under the provisions of the regulation which in most cases resulted in an other than honorable discharge.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090018061
He advised the applicant that he was recommending a general under honorable conditions discharge and that he had the right to decline the discharge and to submit a statement in his own behalf. 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 was serving in the pay grade of E-1 when discharge proceedings were initiated against him and...
ARMY | BCMR | CY1997 | 9707173C070209
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 he application was filed within the time established by statute, and if not, whether it would be in the interest of justice to waive the failure to timely file. The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein. Accordingly, the applicant was...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2001 | 2001064412C070421
On 17 March 1974, he was honorably discharged, in pay grade E-3, based on his enlistment in the ARARNG. Such personnel were issued a general or honorable discharge, as appropriate, except that a recommendation for a general discharge had to be initiated by the immediate commander and the individual had to consult with legal counsel. Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations – Enlisted Personnel), paragraph 3-7 provides that an honorable discharge is a separation with honor.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002072420C070403
The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein. On 13 February 1976, his company commander initiated discharge proceedings under Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 5-37 (Expeditious Discharge Program). This program provided that an individual who had completed at least 6 months, but less than 36 months of active duty and who demonstrated (by poor attitude, lack of motivation, lack of self-discipline, inability to adapt...
ARMY | BCMR | CY1997 | 9707173
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 he application was filed within the time established by statute, and if not, whether it would be in the interest of justice to waive the failure to timely file. The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein. The appropriate authority approved the...