| Mr. Carl W. S. Chun | Director | |
| Ms. Yvonne J. Foskey . | Analyst |
| Ms. Shirley L. Powell | Chairperson | ||
| Mr. Walter T. Morrison | Member | ||
| Mr. Thomas A. Pagan | Member |
APPLICANT REQUESTS: In effect, that his general, under honorable conditions discharge (GD) be upgraded to an honorable discharge (HD).
APPLICANT STATES: In effect, he requested an upgrade of his discharge from the Army Discharge Review Board (ADRB) in 1995, and was never informed of the ADRB decision on his case. He would now like this Board to upgrade his discharge.
EVIDENCE OF RECORD: The applicant's military records show:
On 14 January 1988, he entered active duty in the Regular Army. He was trained in and awarded military occupational specialty (MOS) 13B (Cannon Crewmember). His record also confirms that the highest rank he attained while serving on active duty was specialist/E-4 (SPC), and it documents no acts of valor, significant achievement, or service warranting special recognition.
The applicant’s record does contain an extensive disciplinary history that includes his acceptance of nonjudicial punishment (NJP) under the provisions of Article 15 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice on three separate occasions. It also shows that between 17 October 1990 and 4 August 1991, he was formally counseled on numerous occasions for disciplinary infractions and poor duty performance by members of his chain of command.
On 24 September 1991, the applicant was notified by his unit commander of the intent to initiate action to separate him from the Army under the provisions of Chapter 13, Army Regulation 635-200, for unsatisfactory performance.
On 25 September 1991, the applicant consulted with legal counsel and, after being advised of the basis for the contemplated separation actions and its effects, he completed an election of rights by waiving his right to counsel. In connection with this processing, he elected to submit a statement in his own behalf. The statement made by the applicant is not part of the separation packet nor is it on file in his record.
On 4 October 1991, the appropriate authority approved the applicant’s separation and directed that he be discharged by reason of unsatisfactory performance under the provisions of chapter 13, Army Regulation 635-200, and that he receive a GD. On 28 October 1991, the applicant was discharged accordingly. The DD Form 214 issued to the applicant at the time of his separation confirms that at that time he had completed a total of 3 years, 9 months, and 15 days of active military service.
On 9 December 1996, the ADRB found that the characterization and reason for the applicant’s discharge were both proper and equitable, and it voted to deny his request to upgrade his discharge.
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 assertion that he was never notified of the ADRB decision in his case. Notwithstanding the lack of official notification, the record shows that the ADRB properly considered the applicant’s request and published its results on 9 December 1996. A copy of the ADRB decisional document is enclosed for the applicant’s information and use.
2. The evidence of record confirms that the applicant’s separation processing was accomplished in accordance with the applicable regulation. Lacking evidence to the contrary, the Board is satisfied that all requirements of law and regulation were met, and that the applicant’s rights were fully protected throughout the separation process.
3. Further, the Board finds that the character of the applicant’s discharge accurately reflects his overall record of service. Therefore, it concludes that an upgrade to his discharge is not warranted at this time.
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
WTM___ __TAP__ __SLP _ DENY APPLICATION
| CASE ID | AR |
| SUFFIX | |
| RECON | |
| DATE BOARDED | |
| TYPE OF DISCHARGE | (HD, GD, UOTHC, UD, BCD, DD, UNCHAR) |
| DATE OF DISCHARGE | |
| DISCHARGE AUTHORITY | AR |
| DISCHARGE REASON | |
| BOARD DECISION | (NC, GRANT , DENY, GRANT PLUS) |
| REVIEW AUTHORITY | |
| ISSUES 1. | |
| 2. | |
| 3. | |
| 4. | |
| 5. | |
| 6. |
ARMY | BCMR | CY2003 | 2003085053C070212
The applicant's DA Form 2-1 (Personnel Qualification Record) shows he was promoted to SPC with an effective date and with a date of rank of 1 November 1993. The applicant was reduced from PFC to private (PV2), pay grade E-2 with an effective date of 21 November 1996 and with a date of rank of 7 March 1991 by Company B, 898th Engineer Battalion Orders Number 4-1, dated 21 November 1996, for unsatisfactory participation. The applicant was discharged from the Army National Guard on 8 March...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2006 | 20060013739
x Member The Board considered the following evidence: Exhibit A - Application for correction of military records. On 5 September 1991, the unit commander notified the applicant that he intended to initiate separation action on him under the provisions of chapter 13, Army Regulation 635-200, by reason of unsatisfactory performance. The separation document (DD Form 214) he was issued at the time shows he completed a total of 1 year, 6 months, and 14 days of active military service and that...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2006 | 20060013875C071029
The applicant states, in effect, that personal problems he experienced while serving at Fort Bragg, North Carolina, interfered with his professional career as a Soldier. On 21 November 1995, the Army Discharge Review Board (ADRB), after careful consideration, determined the applicant's discharge was proper and equitable and it voted to deny the applicant's petition to upgrade his discharge. The evidence of record confirms the applicant's separation processing was accomplished in accordance...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2005 | 20050003939C070206
THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE: 1. He stated the authority performing the background check contacted the Department of Defense (DOD) to get a better understanding of this charge and DOD officials informed the investigator it was a felony charge and the applicant’s discharge was equivalent to a conviction. The U.S. Court of Appeals, observing that applicants to the Army Discharge Review Board (ADRB) are by statute allowed 15 years to apply there, and that this Board's...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2004 | 20040005903C070208
The applicant provides an application to the Army Discharge Review Board (ADRB) in support of his application. The ADRB further recommended that The Adjutant General (TAG) of the States of Washington upgrade the applicant’s discharge from the WAARNG to a GD and change the authority and reason for his discharge to paragraph 27y, National Guard Regulation (NGR) 600-200, by reason of “as a result of discharge from the Reserve of the Army”. Paragraph 8-27y provides the authority to discharge...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080010746
THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE: 1. The applicant requests, in effect, that his general, under honorable conditions discharge (GD) be upgraded to an honorable discharge (HD). However, there is insufficient evidence to support granting the requested relief.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2001 | 2001066144C070421
The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein. On 19 October 1998, the Army Discharge Review Board (ADRB) reviewed the applicant’s case, and it determined that the quality of the applicant’s overall record of service was sufficiently mitigating to warrant an upgrade of his UOTHC discharge to a GD. DISCUSSION : Considering all the evidence, allegations, and information presented by the applicant, together with the...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100012622
Application for correction of military records (with supporting documents provided, if any). The applicant requests that his general discharge (GD) be upgraded to an honorable discharge (HD). _______ _ 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 | CY2003 | 2003083832C070212
On 27 November 1991, the unit commander notified the applicant of initiation of separation action under the provisions of chapter 14-12a, Army Regulation 635-200, for misconduct – minor disciplinary infractions, with a UOTHC discharge. On 2 January 1992, the appropriate authority approved the separation with a UOTHC discharge and an Under Other Than Honorable Conditions Discharge Certificate (DA Form 794A). The evidence of record reflects that the appropriate authority approved the...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2004 | 20040008204C070208
| |Member | The Board considered the following evidence: Exhibit A - Application for correction of military records. The U.S. Court of Appeals, observing that applicants to the Army Discharge Review Board (ADRB) are by statute allowed 15 years to apply there, and that this Board's exhaustion requirement (Army Regulation 15-185, paragraph 2-8), effectively shortens that filing period, has determined that the 3 year limit on filing to the Army Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR)...