| Mr. Carl W. S. Chun | Director | |
| Mrs. Carolyn G. Wade | Analyst |
| Mr. Fred N. Eichorn | Chairperson | |
| Mr. Roger W. Able | Member | |
| Mr. Harry B. Oberg | Member |
APPLICANT REQUESTS: In effect, that his narrative reason for discharge be changed from "unsatisfactory performance" to "tour of duty over."
APPLICANT STATES: In effect, that he was a 19-year old kid when he was discharged and that he is now a 41-year old, responsible man. He wants to be a model for his son, and unsatisfactory performance is not representative of the man he is today.
EVIDENCE OF RECORD: The applicant's military records show:
He enlisted in the Regular Army on 26 August 1980 for a period of 3 years. He enlisted for the United States Army Training of Choice Enlistment Option, military occupational specialty (MOS) 94B, Cook. Following completion of all military service, the applicant was awarded MOS 94B and was assigned to Germany as his first permanent duty assignment.
Following completion of his tour of duty in Germany, the applicant was assigned to Fort Dix, New Jersey. While serving at Fort Dix, the applicant displayed an inability to get along with co-workers. He was counseled by members of his chain of command, to include his company commander. Counseling statements refer to his acceptance of two nonjudicial punishments (NJP) under Article 15, Uniform Code of Military Justice, for failure to obey a lawful order and failure to repair. The NJP's are not a matter of record.
On or about 24 May 1983, the applicant was notified that he was being considered for separation with an honorable discharge under the provisions of chapter 13, Army Regulation 635-200, for unsatisfactory performance. The applicant acknowledged notification and declined to submit a statement in his own behalf. The appropriate authority approved the applicant's separation on 31 May 1983. Accordingly, the applicant was released from active duty with an honorable discharge on 3 June 1983, after completing 2 years, 9 months, and 8 days of creditable military service. He was transferred to the United States Army Reserve (USAR) Control Group Reinforcement.
On 25 August 1986, the USAR Personnel Center, Orders Number D-08-06311 discharged the applicant from the USAR, Ready Reserve.
The applicant submitted a request to the Army Discharge Review Board (ADRB) to change his reenlistment eligibility (RE) code. The ADRB notified the applicant that changing his RE code was not within their purview. On 6 November 1984, the ADRB closed the applicant's case and told him to submit an Application for Correction of Military Record (DD Form 149) to this Board to change his RE code.
Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel. Chapter 13 contains the policy and outlines the procedures for separating individuals for unsatisfactory performance, and provides, in pertinent part, that commanders will separate a member under this chapter when, in the commander's judgment, the member will not develop sufficiently to participate satisfactorily in further training and/or become a satisfactory soldier.
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. For historical purposes, the Army has an interest in maintaining the accuracy of its records. The data and information contained in those records should actually reflect the conditions and circumstances that existed at the time the records were created. In the absence of a showing of material error or injustice, this Board is reluctant to recommend that those records be changed.
3. From a records review, the applicant apparently had no problems in basic combat training or in advanced individual training. Likewise, his first duty assignment as a cook in Germany appears to have been successfully concluded. However, he had problems adjusting to his new environment when he arrived at Fort Dix in July 1982. This led to counselings and NJP's in an attempt to correct his attitude and duty performance. Ultimately, he was processed for an administrative separation when his duty performance did not improve.
4. The discharge proceedings were conducted in accordance with law and regulations applicable at the time. The honorable character of the discharge is commensurate with the applicant's overall record of military service. The narrative reason for separation accurately reflects his last year of active service.
5. The Board acknowledges the applicant's successful transition to civilian life and noted the many accomplishments outlined in his application and in the documents with his application. However, in review of the applicant’s entire service record, the Board found that these accomplishments did not overcome the reason for discharge.
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
__fne___ __rwa___ __rtd___ DENY APPLICATION
| CASE ID | AR2002067229 |
| SUFFIX | |
| RECON | |
| DATE BOARDED | 20020611 |
| TYPE OF DISCHARGE | HD |
| DATE OF DISCHARGE | 19830603 |
| DISCHARGE AUTHORITY | AR 635-200, c13 |
| DISCHARGE REASON | |
| BOARD DECISION | DENY |
| REVIEW AUTHORITY | |
| ISSUES 1. | 144.9405 |
| 2. | |
| 3. | |
| 4. | |
| 5. | |
| 6. |
ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | 20110003498
Application for correction of military records (with supporting documents provided, if any). On 27 September 1983, his command initiated separation proceedings under Army Regulation 635-200, Chapter 13, for unsatisfactory performance. On 5 June 1984, the Army Discharge Review Board (ADRB) denied the applicant's request to upgrade his discharge and did not deem it appropriate to change his narrative reason for discharge.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2015 | 20150001582
The applicant requests upgrade of his general discharge (GD) to an honorable discharge (HD). On 12 May 1983, the unit commander notified the applicant he was initiating action to separate him for unsatisfactory performance with a GD. There is no indication that the applicant applied to the Army Discharge Review Board (ADRB) for an upgrade of his discharge within that board's 15-year statute of limitations.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080012839
However, the entry in item 23a on the DD Form 214 was meant to indicate what MOS he held at the time of his separation, not the MOS(s) in which he performed duties. Therefore, there is insufficient evidence as a basis to correct his DD Form 214 to show he held an MOS as a tank driver or EMT medic. Therefore, the Board determined that the overall merits of this case are insufficient as a basis for correction of the records of the individual concerned.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2006 | 20060014488C071029
The DD Form 214 he was issued at the time shows he completed 5 months and 6 days of active duty service during the period covered by the DD Form 214. The applicant's record does show he completed two food service courses in 1972 and 1976; however, it also shows that he was awarded MOS 11B in 1976, and that he was ordered to active duty in that MOS. The Board determined that the evidence presented was sufficient to warrant a recommendation for partial relief and to excuse failure to timely file.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002083077C070215
The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein. On 18 June 1973, the applicant’s chain of command counseled him. However, in review of the applicant’s entire service record, the Board found that these accomplishments did not overcome the reason for discharge and characterization of service granted.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100009948
The applicant requests, in effect, correction of Block 14 (District Area Command or Corps to Which Reservist Transferred) of his DD Form 214 (Armed Forces of the United States Report of Transfer or Discharge) to show he completed Advanced Individual Training (AIT) at Fort Polk, LA. The applicant's service records contain no evidence of the purchase of U.S. Savings Bonds. There is no evidence in the record, and the applicant has provided no evidence, to show that he ever purchased U.S....
ARMY | BCMR | CY2007 | 20070004047C071029
The applicant requests, in effect, that his discharge be upgraded to honorable. He is describes as often speaking of his training and the time he served in the Army with pride and honor – even though he was discharged under less than honorable circumstances. As a result, the Board recommends that all Department of the Army records of the individual concerned be corrected by upgrading the applicant's under other than honorable conditions discharge to a general, under honorable...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2006 | 20060010999C071029
The applicant requests, in effect, that his general, under honorable conditions discharge (GD) be upgraded to an honorable discharge (HD). There is no indication that the applicant applied to the Army Discharge Review Board (ADRB) for an upgrade of his discharge within the ADRB's 15-year statute of limitations. Further, the applicant's misconduct clearly diminished his overall record of service below that meriting a fully honorable discharge.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080005647
The applicant requests that his DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) be corrected to show award of the Army Achievement Medal (AAM) and the "Connelly Award." There is no evidence the applicant received the "Connelly Award." ___ XXX ___ CHAIRPERSON I certify that herein is recorded the true and complete record of the proceedings of the Army Board for Correction of Military Records in this case.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2004 | 2004104618C070208
James B. Gunlicks | |Member | The Board considered the following evidence: Exhibit A - Application for correction of military records. It provides that an enlistment bonus is an enlistment incentive offered to those enlisting in the RA for duty in a specific MOS. The character of the discharge is commensurate with the applicant's overall record of military service.