| Mr. Carl W. S. Chun | Director | |
| Mr. Robert J. McGowan | Analyst |
| Ms. Shirley L. Powell | Chairperson | |
| Mr. Allen L. Raub | Member | |
| Mr. Thomas E. O'Shaughnessy, Jr. | Member |
APPLICANT REQUESTS: That his general discharge (GD) be upgraded to an honorable discharge (HD).
APPLICANT STATES: He is in civil confinement and was told to request a discharge upgrade by the State Parole Board.
EVIDENCE OF RECORD: The applicant's military records show:
He enlisted in the Regular Army for 3 years on 27 January 1978. While assigned to Fort Benning, Georgia, he was AWOL (absent without leave) from 8-21 August 1978. He accepted nonjudicial punishment (NJP) under Article 15, Uniform Code of Military Justice, on 25 August 1978 and was punished by reduction to private, forfeiture of $90, and 14 days of restriction and extra duty.
The applicant was AWOL again from 11-18 September 1978. Court-martial charges were preferred against him. He was tried and convicted by a special court-martial on 11 October 1978. Sentenced to 15 days' confinement, he was transferred to the United States Army Retraining Brigade (USARB), Fort Riley, Kansas. After serving his sentence to confinement, he remained at the USARB in a non-confinement status.
At the USARB, the applicant received several NJPs and numerous disciplinary reports. On 5 December 1978, his commander recommended that he be separated under the provisions of chapter 13, Army Regulation 635-200, for unsuitability. On 7 December 1978, the applicant consulted with legal counsel who explained the discharge process and the rights available to him. He waived his rights and elected not to provide a statement in his own behalf. Further rehabilitative efforts were waived and, on 13 December 1978, the approving authority approved the applicant's separation with a GD.
The applicant was separated with a GD on 14 December 1978. He had a total of 8 months, 23 days of creditable service and 55 days of lost time due to AWOL and confinement.
Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the policy and prescribes the procedures for administrative separation of enlisted personnel. Chapter 13, in effect at the time, provided for the separation of individuals whose record evidenced apathy (lack of appropriate interest), defective attitude, and an inability to expend effort constructively. When separation for unsuitability was warranted, an honorable or general discharge was issued as determined by the separation authority based upon the individual’s entire record.
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 discharge proceedings were conducted in accordance with law and regulations applicable at the time. The character of the discharge is commensurate with the applicant's overall record of military service.
3. 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
__slp ___ __alr ___ ___teo___ DENY APPLICATION
| CASE ID | AR2001058923 |
| SUFFIX | |
| RECON | |
| DATE BOARDED | 20011023 |
| TYPE OF DISCHARGE | GD |
| DATE OF DISCHARGE | 19781214 |
| DISCHARGE AUTHORITY | AR 635-200 C13 |
| DISCHARGE REASON | |
| BOARD DECISION | (NC, GRANT , DENY, GRANT PLUS) |
| REVIEW AUTHORITY | DIRECTOR |
| ISSUES 1. | 110.0000 |
| 2. | |
| 3. | |
| 4. | |
| 5. | |
| 6. |
ARMY | BCMR | CY2001 | 2001064332C070421
On the same date, the Cadre Review Board determined that the applicant should be separated under the On 6 October 1983, the Army Discharge Review Board denied the applicant’s request for an upgrade of his discharge. Army policy states that a UOTHC discharge is normally considered appropriate, but a GD under honorable conditions or an honorable discharge may be granted.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002072151C070403
The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein. EVIDENCE OF RECORD : The applicant's military records show: On 5 February 1977, nonjudicial punishment (NJP) was imposed against him for failure to go to his place of duty.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002070892C070402
EVIDENCE OF RECORD : The applicant's military records show: On that same date, the applicant's commander recommended that the applicant be eliminated from the military. He had completed 1 year, 10 months and 4 days of creditable active military service and he had 81 days of lost time due to being in military confinement.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2001 | 2001055081C070420
The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein. There is no evidence in the record, nor has the applicant presented any, to show that he requested discharge for the good of the service in lieu of trial by court-martial under the provisions of chapter 10, Army Regulation 635-200. There is no evidence in the record, nor has the applicant presented any, to show that he requested to speak with the Commanding General and...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100008956
The applicant's separation packet is not contained in the available records; however, his records contain a duly-constituted DD Form 214 that shows he was discharged under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations - Enlisted Personnel), chapter 13, paragraph 13-5a(1) with a separation program designator (SPD) code of "JBL." There is no record the applicant petitioned the Army Discharge Review Board (ADRB) for an upgrade of his discharge within board's 15-year statute...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002075898C070403
Accordingly, he was discharged under honorable conditions on 25 July 1973, under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 13, for unsuitability due to a character and behavior disorder. Consequently, due to the concepts involved, an individual’s medical condition, although not considered medically unfitting for military service at the time of processing for separation, discharge or retirement, may be sufficient to qualify the individual for VA benefits based on an evaluation by...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2003 | 2003089566C070403
APPLICANT STATES : In effect, that rank on his DD Form 214 indicates PV1; however, his discharge certificate lists his rank as SP4. However, the evidence of record confirms that the applicant was reduced from the rank of SP4 to the rank of PV1 on 2 December 1982, as a result of a summary court-martial sentence. Further, he authenticated the DD Form 214 with his signature, thereby verifying that the information contained therein, to include his rank, was correct at the time the document was...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002080026C070215
The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein. He completed his AIT and was transferred to Fort Riley on 21 September 1973. There is no evidence in the available records to show that he ever applied to the Army Discharge Review Board for an upgrade of his discharge within that board’s 15-year statute of limitations.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2001 | 2001057010C070420
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. On 15 April 1969, the applicant’s commander initiated separation action under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-212 for unsuitability. A second memorandum, dated 8 February 1978, and better known as the Nelson Memorandum, expanded the review policy and specified that the presence of a personality disorder diagnosis would...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2001 | 2001064026C070421
The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein. EVIDENCE OF RECORD : The applicant's military records show: The character of the discharge was lenient considering the applicant's overall record of military service.