| Mr. Carl W. S. Chun | Director | |
| Mr. Jessie B. Strickland | Analyst |
| Ms. Irene N. Wheelwright | Chairperson | |
| Mr. Fred N. Eichorn | Member | |
| Ms. Gail J. Wire | Member |
APPLICANT REQUESTS: That her general discharge be upgraded to honorable.
APPLICANT STATES: In effect, that her general discharge was caused by an undiagnosed disorder and that had it been discovered prior to her discharge, she would have received an honorable discharge. She also states that her having a general discharge causes her anxiety and upsets her. It also reminds her of her service-connected trauma and she contends that she has received a
service-connected rating of 100% from the Veterans Administration (VA).
EVIDENCE OF RECORD: The applicant's military records show:
She enlisted in Seattle, Washington on 20 February 1973 for a period of 3 years, training as a personnel specialist and assignment to Europe.
She successfully completed her training and was transferred to Germany on 21 July 1973 for duty as a clerk. She was advanced to the pay grade of E-4 on 9 August 1974.
On 15 January 1975, nonjudicial punishment was imposed against her for disobeying a lawful order from a senior noncommissioned officer and for being absent from her place of duty. Her punishment consisted of a reduction to the pay grade of E-3.
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). He cited as the basis for his recommendation the applicant’s repetitive display of habits and traits of character manifested by immature and undisciplined behavior, her disregard of unit policy and her failure to respond to numerous counseling sessions.
The applicant acknowledged the commander’s notification and indicated that she accepted discharge from the Army under the conditions stated (general discharge) and she elected not to submit a statement in her own behalf.
The appropriate authority approved the recommendation for discharge and directed that she be furnished a General Discharge Certificate based on her discharge for unsuitability by reason of apathy, defective attitudes and her inability to expend effort constructively.
Accordingly, she was discharged under honorable conditions on 31 January 1975 under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 5-37 for unsuitability. She had served 1 year, 11 months and 11 days of total active service.
The Department of the Army began testing the 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’s acceptability, performance of duty and/or potential for continued effective service fall below the standards required for retention in the Army. Soldiers could 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. Soldiers had to consent to separation under this program in order for commanders to separate them under the EDP. 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.
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 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 applicant’s administrative separation was accomplished in compliance with applicable regulations with no violations or procedural errors which would tend to jeopardize her rights.
3. Accordingly, the type of discharge directed and the reasons therefor were appropriate considering all of the available facts of the case.
4. The applicant’s contentions have been noted by the Board; however, they are not supported by either the evidence submitted with her application or the evidence of record. She was properly notified of the commander’s intent to recommend separation and was required to consent to the separation before the recommendation could be processed further. The applicant consented to the separation under the EDP and elected not to submit matters in her own behalf.
5. The Board finds that her service was not fully honorable and lacking evidence to show otherwise, finds that there is no basis to upgrade her discharge to fully honorable.
6. 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
____gw__ __inw ___ ___fe ___ DENY APPLICATION
| CASE ID | AR2001056531 |
| SUFFIX | |
| RECON | YYYYMMDD |
| DATE BOARDED | 2001/08/09 |
| TYPE OF DISCHARGE | (GD) |
| DATE OF DISCHARGE | 1975/01/31 |
| DISCHARGE AUTHORITY | AR 635-200/CH5 |
| DISCHARGE REASON | EDP |
| BOARD DECISION | DENY |
| REVIEW AUTHORITY | |
| ISSUES 1. 730 | 144.7800/A78.00/EDP |
| 2. | |
| 3. | |
| 4. | |
| 5. | |
| 6. |
ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | 20110006342
A general discharge is the separation from the Army under honorable conditions of an individual whose military record was not sufficiently meritorious to warrant an honorable discharge. The applicant's request for upgrade of his discharge under honorable conditions was carefully considered; however, the evidence of record is insufficient to grant relief in this case. ____________X_____________ CHAIRPERSON I certify that herein is recorded the true and complete record of the proceedings of...
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 | CY2011 | 20110006127
On 30 September 1975, the applicant's commander notified him that he was initiating action to discharge him from the service with a general discharge under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations), paragraph 5-37, and the Expeditious Discharge Program (EDP). There is no evidence in the available records to show he ever applied to the Army Discharge Review Board for an upgrade of his discharge within that board's 15-year statute of limitations. The applicant's...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100028876
On 21 February 1975, his commander informed the applicant that he was initiating action to discharge him under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations Enlisted Personnel), under the Expeditious Discharge Program (EDP). There is no indication he applied to the Army Discharge Review Board for an upgrade of his discharge within that board's 15-year statute of limitations. Based on his record of indiscipline, his service clearly did not meet the standards of...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002076604C070215
She was honorably discharged form the U. S. Army Reserve on 24 April 1991. A general discharge is a separation from the Army under honorable conditions of an individual whose military record is not sufficiently meritorious to warrant an honorable discharge. That all of the Department of the Army records related to this case be corrected by showing that the applicant was separated from the service with an Honorable Discharge Certificate on 19 April 1976.
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...
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 | CY2011 | 20110011845
The applicant requests an upgrade of his General Discharge (GD), under honorable conditions to a fully Honorable Discharge (HD). On 3 June 1975, the applicants immediate commander notified the applicant that he intended to recommend his discharge from the Army under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations - Enlisted Personnel), paragraph 5-37 (Expeditious Discharge Program (EDP)) with a GD, under honorable conditions. The separation authority approved the...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2013 | 20130013484
On 15 March 1977, his immediate commander notified him that he was initiating action to discharge him from the Army under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations Enlisted Personnel), paragraph 5-37 (Expeditious Discharge Program (EDP)). On 6 April 1977, the applicant was discharged accordingly. The evidence of record shows the applicant demonstrated he could not or would not meet acceptable standards required of enlisted personnel because of his inability to...
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.