| Mr. Carl W. S. Chun | Director | |
| Mr. Jessie B. Strickland | Analyst |
| Mr. Fred N. Eichorn | Chairperson | ||
| Mr. Melvin H. Meyer | Member | ||
| Mr. Patrick H. McGann | Member |
THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE:
1. The applicant requests that his general discharge be upgraded to honorable.
2. The applicant offers no argument or evidence in support of his request for an upgrade of his discharge.
CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:
1. The applicant is requesting correction of an injustice which occurred on 3 August 1978. The application submitted in this case is dated 27 February 2003.
2. Title 10, U.S. Code, Section 1552(b), provides that applications for correction of military records must be filed within 3 years after discovery of the alleged error or injustice. This provision of law allows the Army Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR) to excuse failure to file within the 3-year statute of limitation if the ABCMR determines that it would be in the interest of justice to do so. In this case, the ABCMR will conduct a review of the merits of the case to determine if it would be in the interest of justice to excuse the applicant’s failure to timely file.
3. The applicant enlisted in Milwaukee, Wisconsin, on 3 August 1977, for a period of 3 years, training as a combat engineer and assignment to Fort Campbell, Kentucky. He completed his training at Fort Leonard Wood, Missouri, and was transferred to Fort Campbell on 14 November 1977.
4. The applicant was arrested by civil authorities in Paducah, Kentucky, on 21 February 1978 and was confined for 1 day before being released to military authorities. His commander directed that the 1 day absence be charged as lost time.
5. On 10 April 1978, nonjudicial punishment (NJP) was imposed against the applicant for disobeying a lawful order from a superior noncommissioned officer and for failure to go to his place of duty. His punishment consisted of a reduction to the pay grade of E-1, a forfeiture of pay, extra duty and restriction.
6. On 14 July 1978, NJP was imposed against him for dereliction of duty. His punishment consisted of a forfeiture of pay, extra duty and restriction.
7. On 19 July 1978, NJP was imposed against him for two specifications of failure to go to his place of duty and breaking restriction. His punishment consisted extra duty and restriction (suspended for 30 days).
8. On 28 July 1978, the applicant's commander notified him that he was initiating action to separate him from the service under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 5-31, under the Expeditious Discharge Program, due to his inability to adapt to military life, his lack of self-discipline, poor attitude and performance. The applicant was informed that he had the right to decline the discharge and that he could submit a statement in his own behalf. The applicant consented voluntarily to accept the discharge and elected not to submit a statement in his own behalf.
9. The commander submitted the recommendation for discharge indicating that the applicant should be discharged because of his recurring absences and lateness, his lack of self discipline as indicated by his civil conviction for theft by unlawful taking, his failure to respond to numerous counseling sessions and his substandard duty performance. The appropriate authority approved the recommendation for discharge on 31 July 1978 and directed that the applicant be furnished a General Discharge Certificate.
10. Accordingly, he was discharged under honorable conditions on 3 August 1978, under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 5-31 and the Expeditious Discharge Program. He had served 1 year and 1 day of total active service and had 1 day of lost time.
11. There is no indication in the available records to show that he ever applied to the Army Discharge Review Board for an upgrade of his discharge within that board's 15-year statute of limitations.
12. The Department of the Army began testing the Expeditious Discharge Program (EDP) in October 1973. In a message dated 8 November 1974 the Deputy Chief of Staff for Personnel announced the expansion of the EDP. The program provided for the separation of soldiers whose acceptability, performance of duty, and/or potential for continued effective service fall below the standards required for retention in the Army. Soldiers may be separated under this program when subjective evaluation of their commanders identifies them as lacking qualities for continued military service because of attitude, motivation, self-discipline, inability to adapt socially or emotionally, or failure to demonstrate promotion potential. Soldiers considered for separation under this expanded program had to agree to separation under this program. Soldiers who did not agree to separation under this provision were not exempt from separation under another provision of the regulation. An honorable or general discharge was required and there has never been any provisions for an automatic upgrade of a discharge less than fully honorable.
DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:
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. The applicant’s administrative discharge was accomplished in accordance with applicable regulations with no violations of the applicant’s rights. Accordingly, his discharge and the reasons therefore were appropriate under the circumstances.
3. Records show the applicant should have discovered the error or injustice now under consideration on 3 August 1978; therefore, the time for the applicant to file a request for correction of any error or injustice expired on 3 August 1981. However, the applicant did not file within the 3-year statute of limitations and has not provided a compelling explanation or evidence to show that it would be in the interest of justice to excuse failure to file in this case.
BOARD VOTE:
________ ________ ______ GRANT RELIEF
________ ________ ______ GRANT FORMAL HEARING
_PM___ __MM__ __FE__ DENY APPLICATION
| CASE ID | AR2003091014 |
| SUFFIX | |
| RECON | |
| DATE BOARDED | 2003/12/02 |
| TYPE OF DISCHARGE | (GD) |
| DATE OF DISCHARGE | 1978/08/03 |
| DISCHARGE AUTHORITY | AR635-200, CH5 . . . . . |
| DISCHARGE REASON | EDP |
| BOARD DECISION | (DENY) |
| REVIEW AUTHORITY | |
| ISSUES 1.516 | 144.2900/A29.00 |
| 2. | |
| 3. | |
| 4. | |
| 5. | |
| 6. |
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002073141C070403
He was returned to Fort Myer on 11 October and on 13 October 1978, the suspended portion of his punishment for the NJP imposed on 27 July 1978 was vacated and he was reduced to the pay grade of E-3. On 9 January 1979, the applicant’s commander initiated action to separate the applicant from the service under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 5-31 and the Expeditious Discharge Program (EDP). Soldiers had to consent to separation under this program in order for commanders...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2001 | 2001057207C070420
The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein. EVIDENCE OF RECORD : The applicant's military records show: You have never completed any physical training event.
ARMY | BCMR | CY1997 | 9709457
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. The applicant requests...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2001 | 2001052915C070420
The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein. The Board considered the following evidence: On 3 September 1978, the commander notified the applicant that he was being recommended for discharge under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 5-31, for failure to maintain acceptable standards for retention (Expeditious Discharge Program(EDP)), with a GD.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002071492C070402
The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein. He received nonjudicial punishment (NJP) that resulted in a loss of rank, extra duty and a transfer to the motor pool. Otherwise, a commander was required to separate soldiers under other provisions of the regulation, which in most cases resulted in an other than honorable discharge.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080008296
The commander stated he was recommending that the applicants service be furnished a General Discharge Certificate. Individuals discharged under the provisions of this paragraph may be awarded an honorable or general discharge. 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 | CY2001 | 2001056531C070420
The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein. On the same day, the commander notified the applicant that he was initiating action to separate her from the service under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 5-37, under the Expeditious Discharge Program (EDP). Otherwise, a commander was required to separate soldiers under other provisions of the regulation which in most cases resulted in an other than...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002075510C070403
The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein. On 5 March 1985, the applicant’s commander initiated action to separate him under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 13, for unsatisfactory performance. Previously, Army Regulation 635-200, the pertinent paragraph in chapter 5, provided that commanders could expeditiously discharge members under the TDP who lacked the necessary motivation, discipline,...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2001 | 2001066186C070421
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. The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein. The applicant's discharge was appropriate because the quality of service was not consistent with the Army's standards for acceptable personal conduct and performance of duty by militarypersonnel.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080008669
Army Regulation 635-200, in effect at the time, set for the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel. Individuals discharged under the provisions of this paragraph may be awarded an honorable or general discharge. 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.