| Mr. Carl W. S. Chun | Director | |
| Mr. G. E. Vandenberg | Analyst |
| Mr. Raymond V. O'Connor, Jr. | Chairperson | |
| Ms. Kathleen A. Newman | Member | |
| Mr. Patrick H. McGann, Jr. | Member |
APPLICANT REQUESTS: That his general discharge be upgraded to honorable.
APPLICANT STATES: In effect, he would like the Board to consider his post service contributions to veterans and his community and grant him an upgrade based upon these post service contributions. He states that since he became a paraplegic in 1981, he has given a large amount of time and effort to working with veterans.
EVIDENCE OF RECORD: The applicant's military records show:
He entered active duty on 2 July 1975. He completed basic combat training and advanced individual training with award of the military occupational specialty (MOS) 52B (Power Generator Operator).
The applicant received nonjudicial punishment under Article 15, Uniform Code of Military Justice, on two occasions: on 1 April 1976 for theft of a floor ashtray from the post exchange; and on 13 December 1976 for failure to go to his appointed place of duty.
The applicant was notified that his command proposed to discharge him under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 13, for unfitness. At this time, the applicant had charges pending for failure to go to his appointed place of duty and being absent with out leave (AWOL) for 1 day. The specifics of these charges are not of record.
On 15 December 1976, the applicant was advised of his rights. In acknowledging those rights, he waived: consideration of his case by a board of officers; making a personal appearance before a board of officers; submitting a personal statement, or the right to counsel. He acknowledged that he might encounter substantial prejudice in civilian life in the event he received a general discharge.
The applicant’s unit commander’s formal recommendation that the applicant be discharged for unfitness indicated that the applicant was a borderline performer. He reported that the applicant had been counseled of numerous occasions, both formally and informally, on what was expected of him. The unit commander indicated that the applicant had been constantly involving himself in actions of a discreditable nature and had been implicated in at least one incident of barracks larceny. The unit commander recommended that the applicant be discharged with an undesirable discharge.
The discharge authority reviewed the recommendation and directed that the applicant be discharged under Army Regulation 635-200, for unfitness, with a general discharge.
The applicant was discharged with a general discharge on 10 January 1977. He had 1 year, 6 months, and 9 days of creditable service.
The applicant submits copies of documents to show his post service efforts, including: his work with the Paralyzed Veterans of America (PVA); award of the PVA’s 2001 Dwain Taylor Award for Voluntary Service; a Certificate of Participation in the 1998 National Veterans' Wheelchair Games; a copy of his academic record at California University of Pennsylvania and a letter showing he made the Dean’s List in 1987; and five 1990 letters of recommendation from members of the college staff attesting to his efforts and character.
Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the policy and prescribes the procedures for administrative separation of enlisted personnel. Chapter 13, in effect at that time, applied to separation for unfitness and unsuitability. Paragraph 13-5(a)1 provided for the separation for unfitness, which included frequent incidents of a discreditable nature, sexual perversion, drug abuse, shirking, failure to pay just debits, failure to support dependents and homosexual acts. When separation for unfitness was warranted, an undesirable discharge was normally considered appropriate.
Army Regulation 635-200, sets forth the purpose and policies for enlisted personnel separations. Chapter 3, as in effect at that time, outlines the criteria for characterization of service. Paragraph 3-7a states that an honorable discharge (HD) is a separation with honor. The honorable characterization of service is appropriate when the quality of the soldier’s service generally has met the standards of acceptable conduct and performance of duty. Paragraph 3-7a(1) in pertinent part states: “A soldier will not necessarily be denied an honorable discharge solely by reason of a specific number of convictions by court-martial or actions under the UCMJ Art l5.” “It is a pattern of behavior and not the isolated instance which should be considered the governing factor in determination of character of service.” Paragraph 3-7b state that a general discharge (GD) is a separation under honorable conditions issued to a soldier whose military record was satisfactory but not so meritorious as to warrant an honorable discharge. Paragraph 3-7c states that an under other than honorable conditions (UOTHC) discharge is issued when there is one or more acts or omissions that constitute a significant departure from conduct expected of a soldier. Paragraph 3-7c(7) specifically addresses issuance of an UOTHC for discharges issued under the provisions of chapter 10 of this regulation.
DISCUSSION: Considering all the evidence, allegations, and information presented by the applicant, together with the evidence of record and applicable law and regulations, it is concluded:
1. The discharge proceedings were conducted in accordance with law and regulations applicable at the time. The character of the discharge was generous as at the time of discharge an undesirable discharge was normally considered appropriate.
2. While the Board applauds the positive actions the applicant has taken to overcome his personal disability and assist others, it finds these efforts are not so meritorious as to outweigh the offenses that lead to his discharge, or the fact that his record of only 1 year, 6 months, and 9 days of service was devoid of any evidence of significant redeeming service.
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. 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.
| CASE ID | AR2003083489 |
| SUFFIX | |
| RECON | |
| DATE BOARDED | 20030703 |
| TYPE OF DISCHARGE | |
| DATE OF DISCHARGE | |
| DISCHARGE AUTHORITY | |
| DISCHARGE REASON | |
| BOARD DECISION | DENY |
| REVIEW AUTHORITY | |
| ISSUES 1. | Upgrade post service |
| 2. | |
| 3. | |
| 4. | |
| 5. | |
| 6. |
ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080009657
Application for correction of military records (with supporting documents provided, if any). The discharge authority approved the request for discharge and directed the applicant be reduced to the lowest enlisted grade and discharged with an UD. Paragraph 3-7c(7) specifically addresses issuance of an UD for discharges issued under the provisions of chapter 10 of this regulation; and c. Chapter 10, as then in effect, provided that a member who had committed an offense or offenses for which...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | 20110020492
She acknowledged that if her request were accepted, she could receive a discharge under other than honorable conditions (UOTHC) and be furnished a UD Certificate. However, at the time of the applicant's separation, the regulation provided for the issuance of a UD. ____________X____________ 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 | CY2006 | 20060015831
The applicant's military service records show that he enlisted in the U.S. Army and entered active duty in the Regular Army for a period of 3 years on 27 August 1974. The DD Form 214 (Report of Separation from Active Duty), issued to the applicant upon his separation, shows that he was discharged on 14 July 1977 in accordance with the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 13-5a(1), that the Separation Program Designator (SPD) Code was JKA", and his character of service was "Under...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2006 | 20060001479C070205
Accordingly, the applicant was discharged on 7 December 1976 with an undesirable discharge under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 13, paragraph 13-5a(4) for unfitness due to an established pattern for shirking. There is no evidence in the available records which shows the applicant applied to the Army Discharge Review Board within its 15-year statute of limitations. Therefore, there is insufficient basis to waive the statute of limitations for timely filing or...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2003 | 2003088672C070403
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 23 June 1976, the separation authority approved the recommendation for separation and directed that the applicant be furnished an undesirable discharge. The Board reviewed the applicant's record of service which included four nonjudicial punishments, one civil conviction for Grand Larceny and 23 days of lost time and...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100000032
The applicant requests, in effect, that his undesirable discharge under other than honorable conditions be upgraded to a medical discharge under honorable conditions so he will be eligible to receive education benefits. On 15 September 1976, the separation authority directed the applicant's discharge under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 13, for misconduct and the issuance of an Undesirable Discharge Certificate. Blocks 9a - 9f of the DD Form 214 (Report of Separation...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2004 | 20040004367C070208
THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE: 1. The applicant states, in effect, that he was never given a reason why he was discharged from the service. The applicant's records show that he received four Article 15s and had two instances of AWOL.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2006 | 20060013680
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 24 April 2007 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20060013680 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, in effect, that his discharge be upgraded to a general discharge under honorable conditions. There is no evidence showing that the applicant applied to the Army Discharge Review Board for an...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2005 | 20050016056C070206
On 14 October 1975, nonjudicial punishment was imposed against the applicant for disorderly conduct (two specifications). There is no evidence in the available records which shows the applicant applied to the Army Discharge Review Board within its 15-year statute of limitations. Since the applicant’s record of service included nine nonjudicial punishments and 24 days of lost time, his record of service was not satisfactory and did not meet the standards of acceptable conduct...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2012 | 20120009187
On 1 March 1976, the applicants immediate commander notified the applicant of his intent to initiate action to eliminate him from the Army under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations Enlisted Personnel), chapter 13, by reason of unfitness. On 18 March 1976, the separation authority approved the recommendation to discharge the applicant and directed he be discharged under the provisions of paragraph 13-5 of Army Regulation 635-200 by reason of unfitness and that...