| Mr. Carl W. S. Chun | Director | |
| Ms. Antoinette Farley | Analyst |
| Mr. John N. Slone | Chairperson | ||
| Mr. Roger W. Able | Member | ||
| Ms. Regan K. Smith | Member |
APPLICANT REQUESTS: That his discharge be upgraded.
APPLICANT STATES: That his undesirable discharge was inequitable because it was based on one isolated incident in 36 months of service with no other adverse actions.
EVIDENCE OF RECORD: The applicant's military records show:
On 7 March 1973, he enlisted in the Regular Army (RA) for 3 years. He completed training and was awarded military occupational specialty (MOS) 62F (Crane Operator) at Fort Hood, Texas where he was assigned to duty in his MOS.
On 16 February 1976, he was transferred to Korea for duty.
On 2 December 1976, he was separated with an honorable discharge for the purposes of immediate reenlistment. On the same day he reenlisted in the RA for 3 years as a crane operator.
On 9 March 1977, the applicant returned to the United States and was stationed at Fort Polk, Louisiana for duty.
The applicant’s medical records are not available. However, on 19 October 1977, the applicant’s commander initiated action to separate him under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 13 5b(2) for unsuitability, due to apathy, defective attitudes, or inability to expend effort constructively as the specific reason for the recommended action. He cited the applicant’s, below average performance with little to no motivation, his resistance of all efforts at rehabilitation and that he would become a severe disciplinary problem, if not discharged. He further stated that the applicant wanted a discharge.
On 21 October 1977, the applicant was advised by consulting counsel of the basis for the contemplated action and elected not to submit a statement in his own behalf. He acknowledged that he understood that he could expect to encounter substantial prejudice in civilian life because of the less than honorable discharge and that he would forfeit all rights administered by Veterans Affairs and might lose other benefits under Federal and state laws.
The applicant received nonjudicial punishment (NJP) under Article 15, Uniform Code of Military Justice on 2 November 1977 for failure to go to his appointed place of duty on 17 October 1977.
The punishment consisted of extra duty for 7 days, reduction to pay grade E-3, suspended for 60 days and forfeiture of $117.00 pay, of which $67.00 was suspended for 60 days.
On 11 November 1977, the appropriate authority approved the recommendation and directed that the applicant be issued an general discharge.
On 9 December 1977, the applicant was separated in pay grade E-4, under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 13 5b(2), for unsuitability, with an under honorable conditions discharge. Under his current period of enlistment he completed 11 months and 11 days of creditable active service and
1-day of lost time.
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. At that time, paragraph
13-5(b) provided for the separation of individuals for unsuitability whose record evidenced apathy (lack of appropriate interest), defective attitudes, 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.
There is no available evidence that the applicant applied to the Army Discharge Review Board, for upgrade of his discharge within its 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. The 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.
2. 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.
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
_JNS _RWA _RKS DENY APPLICATION
| CASE ID | AR2003087721 |
| SUFFIX | |
| RECON | |
| DATE BOARDED | 2003.08.21 |
| TYPE OF DISCHARGE | UD |
| DATE OF DISCHARGE | 19771209 |
| DISCHARGE AUTHORITY | AR635-200, ch 13 5b(2). |
| DISCHARGE REASON | |
| BOARD DECISION | DENY |
| REVIEW AUTHORITY | |
| ISSUES 1. | |
| 2. | A110.02 |
| 3. | A123.01 |
| 4. | |
| 5. | |
| 6. |
ARMY | BCMR | CY2006 | 20060004797C070205
The applicant requests that his general discharge be upgraded to honorable. On 2 August 1977, the separation authority approved the recommendation for separation and directed that the applicant be furnished a general discharge. Therefore, there is insufficient basis to waive the statute of limitations for timely filing or for correction of the records of the individual concerned.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2012 | 20120022239
The applicant requests an upgrade of his general discharge to an honorable discharge for medical reasons. The applicant was accordingly discharged on 23 September 1976. As a result, the Board recommends that all Department of the Army records of the individual concerned be corrected by showing he was separated from the service with an Honorable Discharge Certificate on 23 September 1976.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100010616
The applicant requests that his general discharge be upgraded to honorable. Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 3-7, provides that an honorable discharge is a separation with honor and entitles the recipient to benefits provided by law. _______ _ 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 | CY2009 | 20090020233
The applicant's unit commander notified him of pending separation action under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations Enlisted Personnel), chapter 13, for unsuitability - apathy, defective attitudes, or inability to expend efforts constructively. There is no evidence of record which shows the applicant applied to the Army Discharge Review Board within that board's 15-year statute of limitations. Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 3-7a, provides that an honorable...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080012256
On 26 August 1981, the applicants immediate commander initiated a Bar to Enlistment/Reenlistment Certificate against the applicant citing his three instances of nonjudicial punishment and extensive history of counseling. This form further shows he completed 4 years and 9 months of creditable active military service. XXX _________________________ CHAIRPERSON I certify that herein is recorded the true and complete record of the proceedings of the Army Board for Correction of Military...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | 20110021596
The DD Form 214 he was issued at the time shows he was discharged under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 13-5b(2) with a general discharge. Army Regulation 635-200 stated when separation for unsuitability was warranted, an honorable or general discharge was issued as appropriate by the member's military record. As a result, the Board recommends that all Department of the Army records of the individual concerned be corrected by: a. voiding his current DD Form 214 with a...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2013 | 20130014589
His service record does not indicate he applied to the Army Discharge Review Board (ADRB) within that board's 15-year statute of limitations. 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. The applicant's record is devoid of any evidence and he did not provide any evidence to show he was ever told he would be issued an honorable discharge 10 years after his...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2003 | 2003090288C070212
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 was discharged on 5 November 1976, in the rank of private, pay grade E-2, under the provisions of AR 635-200, paragraph 13-5b(3), after having completed 1 year, 5 months, and 6 days active military service. Item 9c (Authority and Reason) of the DD Form 214 that was issued the applicant shows that...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2012 | 20120001256
The regulation stated when separation for unsuitability was warranted an honorable or general discharge was issued as appropriate by the member's military record. Although the applicant contends he was separated due to no disciplinary action, the available evidence shows he was counseled on three occasions for failure to be at his appointed place of duty and he received two NJPs. _______ _ __x_____ ___ CHAIRPERSON I certify that herein is recorded the true and complete record of the...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2005 | 20050002481C070206
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 20 September 2005 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20050002481 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 unit commander recommended that the applicant be required to appear before a board of officers to determine whether he should be discharged before his expiration of his term of service. He had completed 1 year,...