| Mr. Carl W. S. Chun | Director | |
| Mr. William Blakely | Analyst |
| Mr. Raymond V. O’Connor, Jr. | Chairperson | ||
| Ms. Gail J. Wire | Member | ||
| Mr. Robert J. Osborn, II | Member |
APPLICANT REQUESTS: In effect, that his general, under honorable conditions discharge (GD) be upgraded to an honorable discharge (HD).
APPLICANT STATES: In effect, that he joined the Army in July 1983 and the majority of his term of service is marked by commendations and promotions. He states that his GD does not reflect the overall quality of his service, which he believes warrants an HD. He states his post service accomplishments include a stellar career as a medical technician that speaks highly of his character and maturity. Finally, he states that during his time in service he was never given ample opportunity to demonstrate his potential to his chain of command.
EVIDENCE OF RECORD: The applicant's military records show:
On 20 July 1983, he enlisted in the Regular Army for 4 years. He successfully completed One Station Unit Training (OSUT) and the basic airborne course. Upon completion of his training, he was awarded military occupational specialty (MOS) 11C (Indirect Fire Infantryman) with the special qualification identifier (SQI) of P (Parachutist). His record documents no acts of valor, significant achievement, or service warranting special recognition, and it confirms that the highest rank he attained while on active duty was specialist four/E-4.
The applicant’s disciplinary history includes his acceptance of nonjudicial punishment (NJP) on 5 September 1985, for failure to go to his appointed place of duty and using disrespectful language toward a noncommissioned officer (NCO). The punishment imposed consisted of a forfeiture of 7 days pay, reduction to pay grade E-3, and 7 days confinement in the Correctional Custody Facility (CCF).
In addition, the applicant was formally counseled by members of his chain of command twice for his bad attitude, disrespect towards soldiers of higher rank, disobeying a lawful order, improvement of his attitude, and demonstrating the proper respect to soldiers senior in rank. In addition, on 2 October 1985, the applicant was barred from reenlistment.
On 12 September 1985, while assigned to the CCF, the applicant was declared a rehabilitation failure by the Commandant of the CCF, after all the efforts made to retrain and rehabilitate him were unsuccessful. The Commandant also recommended that serious consideration be given to processing the applicant for separation from the Army.
On 8 October 1985, the applicant’s unit commander notified him that separation action was being initiated against him under the provisions of chapter 13, Army Regulation 635-200, for unsatisfactory performance. The unit commander cited the applicant’s history of unsatisfactory performance, his 5 September 1985 NJP, and the recommendation of the CCF Commandant as the reasons he initiated separation action.
The applicant consulted legal counsel and was advised of the basis for the contemplated separation action, and he elected not to submit a statement in his own behalf. The appropriate authority approved the applicant’s separation with a GD, and on 23 October 1985, the applicant was discharged accordingly. At the time of his discharge, he had completed a total of 2 years, 3 months, and
4 days of creditable active military service.
There is no evidence showing that the applicant applied to the Army Discharge Review Board for an upgrade of his discharge within its 15-year statue of limitations.
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. The Board notes the applicant’s contention that his discharge should be upgraded based on the overall quality of his service and because he was never allowed to demonstrate his potential to his chain of command. However, it finds insufficient evidence to support this claim.
2. The evidence of record shows that the applicant’s separation was based upon his unsatisfactory performance as a soldier based on his failure to meet the Army’s acceptable standards for personal conduct and performance of duty. His discharge processing was accomplished in accordance with the applicable regulations in effect at the time. The Board is satisfied that all requirements of law and regulation were met, the rights of the applicant were fully protected throughout the separation process, and his discharge accurately reflects his overall quality of service.
3. The Board also considered the applicant’s post service conduct and accomplishment, but found this factor was not sufficiently mitigating to warrant the requested relief.
4. 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.
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
__RVO__ __GJW _ __ RJO __ DENY APPLICATION
| CASE ID | AR2002080744 |
| SUFFIX | |
| RECON | YYYYMMDD |
| DATE BOARDED | 2003/02/13 |
| TYPE OF DISCHARGE | GD |
| DATE OF DISCHARGE | 19851023 |
| DISCHARGE AUTHORITY | AR 635-200. . . . . |
| DISCHARGE REASON | Unsatisfactory Performance |
| BOARD DECISION | DENY |
| REVIEW AUTHORITY | |
| ISSUES 1. | 144.4900 |
| 2. | 144.9211 |
| 3. | 144.9203 |
| 4. | |
| 5. | |
| 6. |
ARMY | BCMR | CY2001 | 2001061641C070421
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. Accordingly, the applicant was discharged on 31 October 1985 with a general discharge under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 13, for unsatisfactory performance. The Board reviewed the applicant’s record of service which included two nonjudicial punishments and determined that his quality of service did not meet...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2013 | 20130002750
The applicant requests an upgrade of his general discharge (GD) to an honorable discharge (HD). Service of Soldiers separated because of unsatisfactory performance under this regulation will be characterized as honorable or under honorable conditions. Based on his record of indiscipline, his service clearly did not meet the standards of acceptable conduct and performance of duty for Army personnel.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002069047C070402
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. EVIDENCE OF RECORD : The...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2007 | 20070009265C080213
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 27 November 2007 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20070009265 I certify that hereinafter is recorded the true and complete record of the proceedings of the Army Board for Correction of Military Records in the case of the above-named individual. The applicants service medical records are not available; therefore, it cannot be determined what his medical condition was during his service or at the time of his separation or that any medical condition rendered...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2007 | 20070018620
On 6 April 1983, and again on 3 May 1983, the applicants commander initiated action to separate him under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 13, for unsatisfactory performance. On 6 May 1983, the applicants commander formally recommended that the applicant be separated under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 13. On 21 June 1983, the applicant was discharged, in pay grade E-3, under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 13, for unsatisfactory...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2001 | 2001052439C070420
The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein. On 20 December 1984, the applicant's commander officially notified him that he was being recommended for discharge under the provisions of chapter 13, Army Regulation 635-200, for unsatisfactory performance. He had 4 days lost time due to being AWOL.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2003 | 2003086395C070212
On 18 July 1985, the commander notified the applicant that he was initiating action to separate him from the service under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 13, for unsatisfactory performance. The commander initiated the recommendation for discharge citing as his reasons, the applicant's continued unsatisfactory performance and conduct, his disciplinary record, his being disqualified from the Personnel Reliability Program, his bar to reenlistment, his failure to respond to...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2012 | 20120018167
The applicant requests her general discharge (GD) be upgraded to an honorable discharge (HD). The record also contains various other incident reports and statements: * two statements related to her disrespectful language toward medical personnel * six statements related to her disrespectful language and/or attitude toward her shift supervisor * seven statements for disrespectful language toward other personnel in positions of authority over her 6. The applicant received 4 NJP's, 4 official...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2006 | 20060002145C070205
David Haasenritter | |Member | The Board considered the following evidence: Exhibit A - Application for correction of military records. COUNSEL'S REQUEST, STATEMENT AND EVIDENCE: Counsel states, in effect, that the evidence of record substantially supports the applicant’s contentions. Service of Soldiers separated because of unsatisfactory performance under this regulation will be characterized as honorable or under honorable conditions.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2004 | 20040009326C070208
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 09 AUGUST 2005 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20040009326 I certify that hereinafter is recorded the true and complete record of the proceedings of the Army Board for Correction of Military Records in the case of the above-named individual. The applicant requests that his records be corrected by upgrading his discharge to honorable. On 4 June 1985, the appropriate separation authority approved the applicant’s discharge, and directed his characterization...