| Mr. Carl W. S. Chun | Director | |
| Ms. P.A. Castle | Analyst |
| Mr. Arthur A. Omartian | Chairperson | |
| Mr. Melvin H. Meyer | Member | |
| Ms. Karen A. Heinz | Member |
APPLICANT REQUESTS: That his general discharge be upgraded to honorable, that he be issued a reentry (RE) code of RE1 and that the narrative reason for his discharge be corrected to Expeditious Discharge Program (EDP).
APPLICANT STATES: In effect, that at the time of his general discharge he was told it would be upgraded automatically in 6 months to honorable. He states he has no evidence to prove this contention.
EVIDENCE OF RECORD: The applicant's military records show:
He enlisted in the Army on 30 July 1979 for 3 years. He successfully completed his initial training and was transferred to Germany on 25 October 1979, for duty as a cannon crewman. On 22 October 1981, the record shows he was reassigned to Fort Ord, California.
On 29 December 1981, the applicant received nonjudicial punishment (NJP) under Article 15, Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ), for failure to go to his appointed place of duty. The punishment included a reduction in grade to E1, and 14 days of extra duty.
Between 16 March 1982 and 11 May 1982 the applicant was formally counseled four times for failure to go to his appointed place of duty, once for failure to follow instructions and once for disrespect to his superior non-commissioned officer.
On 12 May 82, the applicant received nonjudicial punishment under Article 15, UCMJ for failure to go to his appointed place of duty and being disrespectful in language to his superior noncommissioned officer. The punishment included forfeiture of $120.00 for 1 month and 14 days of extra duty.
On 13 May 1982, the applicant’s commander initiated action to discharge him from the service under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 5-31, as a substandard soldier with an extremely poor attitude and the failure to respond favorably to six counseling sessions. The applicant acknowledged the proposed discharge and did not submit a statement in his own behalf. The recommendation was approved by the appropriate authority and the applicant was discharged under honorable conditions on 21 May 1982, under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 5-31, and the EDP. This program provided for the separation of soldiers when subjective evaluation by their commanders identified 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.
There is no evidence in the available records to show that the applicant applied to the Army Discharge Review Board within that board’s 15-year statute of limitations.
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 applicant’s administrative discharge was accomplished in conformance with applicable regulations with no violations of any of his rights.
2. Accordingly, it appears that the type of discharge, the narrative reason for discharge, and the RE code directed and the reasons therefore were appropriate under the circumstances.
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 this requirement.
4. The applicant’s contentions have been noted by the Board and are not supported either by evidence submitted with his application or the evidence of record.
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
___ao___ __mm___ __kah___ DENY APPLICATION
| CASE ID | AR2001060677 |
| SUFFIX | |
| RECON | YYYYMMDD |
| DATE BOARDED | 2002/01/29 |
| TYPE OF DISCHARGE | |
| DATE OF DISCHARGE | |
| DISCHARGE AUTHORITY | |
| DISCHARGE REASON | |
| BOARD DECISION | DENY |
| REVIEW AUTHORITY | |
| ISSUES 1. 189 | 110.0000 |
| 2. 7 | 100.0600 |
| 3. 191 | 110.0200 |
| 4. | |
| 5. | |
| 6. |
ARMY | BCMR | CY2012 | 20120012740
The applicant requests an upgrade of his general discharge to a fully honorable discharge. On 25 May 1982, his immediate commander advised him that he intended to initiate action to discharge him from the Army under the provisions of paragraph 5-31 (Expeditious Discharge Program (EDP)) of Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations) by reason of poor attitude, lack of motivation, lack of self-discipline, and failure to demonstrate promotion potential. The DD Form 214 he was issued...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2015 | 20150001134
The applicant requests correction of his military records by upgrading his general discharge to an honorable discharge. On 20 May 1982, the separation authority approved the applicant's recommendation for separation under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 5-31, and directed the applicant be furnished a DD Form 257A (General Discharge Certificate). Accordingly, on 28 May 1982, the applicant was discharged.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140009982
On 6 January 1982, his troop commander notified him he was initiating action to discharge him from the U.S. Army under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations Enlisted Personnel), paragraph 5-31 (Expeditious Discharge Program (EDP)), with his service characterized as under honorable conditions. On 27 January 1982, the separation authority approved the applicant's separation and directed his transfer to the U.S. Army Reserve (USAR) to complete his service...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100023039
THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE: 1. The applicant requests upgrade of her general discharge to an honorable discharge. She stated in her statement that she was willing to accept the discharge in order to benefit the Army and herself.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080019137
This document also shows both the applicant and physician placed their signatures on the document. Item 25 shows, in pertinent part, the medical doctor entered allergic penicillin, subcutaneous cyst right face; passed renal stone 1979, no problem since; and painful feet in basic training. This document also shows both the applicant and physician placed their signatures on the document. Thus, the evidence of record shows that the applicants record of service did not meet the standards of...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2007 | 20070011562
On 16 November 1981, the separation authority approved the applicants discharge under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations), paragraph 5-31, the Expeditious Discharge Program (EDP) and ordered the applicant be furnished a General Discharge Certificate. There is no indication that the applicant applied to the Army Discharge Review Board for an upgrade of his discharge within its 15-year statute of limitation 11. Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080013525
On 12 October 1979, the separation authority approved the applicant's discharge for failure to meet acceptable standards for continued military service and directed that he receive a General Discharge Certificate. On 23 October 1979, the applicant was discharged accordingly. A general discharge is a separation from the Army under honorable conditions of an individual whose military record was not sufficiently meritorious to warrant an honorable discharge.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080007996
The applicant's record contains a DA Form 4856 (General Counseling Form), dated 15 July 1982, which shows that on 6 July 1982, the applicant was counseled on his un-Soldierly bearing, bad attitude, and poor duty performance. The applicant's record shows he completed 2 years and 3 days of total active military service with no lost time. There is no evidence that the applicant applied to the Army Discharge Review Board for upgrade of his discharge within its 15-year statute of limitations.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2013 | 20130006713
On 23 October 1979, the applicant acknowledged that his unit commander notified him he was initiating action which could result in separation from the Army with a general discharge under honorable conditions under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 14, for frequent incidents of a discreditable nature with civil or military authorities. g. page 30 shows that the applicant's counsel requested a continuance of the board proceedings and counsel and the board recorder argued over...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002068738C070402
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. There is no indication in...