IN THE CASE OF:
BOARD DATE: 5 January 2010
DOCKET NUMBER: AR20090012282
THE BOARD CONSIDERED THE FOLLOWING EVIDENCE:
1. Application for correction of military records (with supporting documents provided, if any).
2. Military Personnel Records and advisory opinions (if any).
THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE:
1. The applicant requests that his general discharge be upgraded to honorable.
2. The applicant states he wants his discharge upgraded so he can get a better job.
3. The applicant provides no documents to substantiate his request.
CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:
1. The applicant enlisted and entered active duty in the Regular Army on 5 March 2002.
2. He completed basic training and military occupational specialty training as an artillery turret mechanic and was assigned to an artillery unit at Fort Hood, Texas.
3. His record contains the following evidence of misconduct:
a. nonjudicial punishment under the provisions of Article 15, Uniform Code of Military Justice, for failure to go to his appointed place of duty on 17 September 2002 and 2 October 2002 and for being drunk on duty on 15 October 2002;
b. counseled for being out of uniform at work on 15 October 2002;
c. arrested for driving under the influence of alcohol on 1 November 2002 with associated counseling for missing formation as a result;
d. counseled about absences from his appointed place of duty five times on 18 and 19 November 2002; and
e. submitted a urine sample on 11 February 2003 that tested positive for marijuana.
4. The battery commander notified the applicant of initiated elimination with a general discharge due to a pattern of misconduct.
5. The applicant waived his rights to consult with counsel and to submit statements in his own behalf.
6. The intermediate commander recommended approval and the separation authority approved the recommendations and directed a general discharge.
7. On 2 April 2003, the applicant was separated under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations), paragraph 14-12b, with a general discharge under honorable conditions due to a pattern of misconduct.
8. In May 2009, the Army Discharge Review Board denied the applicant's appeal to upgrade his discharge to honorable.
9. Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel. Chapter 14 establishes policy and prescribes procedures for separating members for misconduct. Specific categories include a pattern of misconduct (consisting of discreditable involvement with civil or military authorities or conduct prejudicial to good order and discipline). Action will be taken to separate a member for misconduct when it is clearly established that rehabilitation is impracticable or is unlikely to succeed. A discharge under other than honorable conditions is normally appropriate for a Soldier discharged under this chapter.
10. Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 3-7a, provides that an honorable discharge is a separation with honor and entitles the recipient to benefits provided by law. The honorable characterization is appropriate when the quality of the member's service generally has met the standards of acceptable conduct and performance of duty for Army personnel or is otherwise so meritorious that any other characterization would be clearly inappropriate.
DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:
1. The applicant states he wants his discharge upgraded so he can get a better job.
2. The applicant's administrative separation was accomplished in compliance with applicable regulations with no indication of procedural errors which would tend to jeopardize his rights.
3. The type of discharge directed and the reasons were therefore appropriate considering all the facts of the case.
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. There is no basis for granting the applicant's request.
BOARD VOTE:
________ ________ ________ GRANT FULL RELIEF
________ ________ ________ GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF
________ ________ ________ GRANT FORMAL HEARING
____X___ ____X___ ____X___ DENY APPLICATION
BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION:
The evidence presented does not demonstrate the existence of a probable error or injustice. 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.
____________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.
ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20090012282
3
ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
1
ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20090012282
2
ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
1
ARMY | DRB | CY2011 | AR20110003663
On 19 December 2000, the applicant waived legal counsel, was advised of the impact of the discharge action, and did not submit a statement in his own behalf. On 20 December 2000, the separation authority waived further rehabilitative efforts and directed that the applicant be discharged with a characterization of service of general, under honorable conditions. Board Discussion, Determination, and Recommendation After carefully examining the applicants record of service during the period...
ARMY | DRB | CY2012 | AR20120007179
Facts and Circumstances: The evidence of record shows that on 19 May 2010, the unit commander notified the applicant of initiation of separation action under the provisions of Chapter 14, paragraph 14-12b, AR 635-200, by reason of pattern of misconduct for multiple acts of misconduct including having unauthorized personnel in his barracks room, several failures to report, disobeying NCOs, or correcting his financial obligations, with a general, under honorable conditions discharge. On 24...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090021320
The applicant requests that his general discharge be upgraded to a fully-honorable discharge. The applicant states he is requesting an upgrade of his discharge due to bad times. On 30 June 2004, the ADRB, in a three-to-two vote, voted to upgrade his discharge to a general discharge.
ARMY | DRB | CY2013 | AR20130007172
On 6 January 2003, the separation authority, waived further rehabilitation and directed the applicants discharge with a characterization of service of general, under honorable conditions. The evidence of record shows that the applicant had incidents of misconduct from a prior period of honorable service and was discharged for a pattern of misconduct. The applicants record does not contain any evidence of time lost during the period of service under review.
ARMY | DRB | CY2010 | AR20100015141
Applicant Name: ????? The intermediate commander reviewed the proposed discharge action and recommended approval of the separation action with a general, under honorable conditions discharge. Board Action Directed President, Army Discharge Review Board Issue a new DD Form 214 Change Characterization to: Change Reason to: No Change Other: No Change RE Code: Grade Restoration: No Yes Grade: No Change Legend: AWOL Absent Without Leave GCM General Court Martial NA Not applicable SCM Summary...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080007996
The applicant's record contains a DA Form 4856 (General Counseling Form), dated 15 July 1982, which shows that on 6 July 1982, the applicant was counseled on his un-Soldierly bearing, bad attitude, and poor duty performance. The applicant's record shows he completed 2 years and 3 days of total active military service with no lost time. There is no evidence that the applicant applied to the Army Discharge Review Board for upgrade of his discharge within its 15-year statute of limitations.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080017121
The applicant requests, in effect, that her general discharge under honorable conditions be upgraded to an honorable discharge. 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. There is no available evidence that convincingly shows her failure to complete advanced individual training and/or that her misconduct were due to her age.
ARMY | DRB | CY2011 | AR20110005943
Applicant Name: ????? The unit commander recommended separation with a general, under honorable conditions discharge. Board Action Directed President, Army Discharge Review Board Issue a new DD Form 214 Change Characterization to: Change Reason to: No Change Other: No Change RE Code: Grade Restoration: No Yes Grade: No Change Legend: AWOL Absent Without Leave GCM General Court Martial NA Not applicable SCM Summary Court Martial BCD Bad Conduct Discharge GD General Discharge NIF Not in the...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090013875
On 16 November 1987, the applicants commander recommended separation from the service under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, Chapter 14, for misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct. On 17 November 1987, the appropriate authority approved the recommendation for discharge and directed that the applicant be issued a general discharge under honorable conditions. There is no evidence that the applicant applied to the Army Discharge Review Board for an upgrade of his discharge...
ARMY | DRB | CY2012 | AR20120006634
Applicant Name: ????? Facts and Circumstances: The evidence of record shows that on 8 May 2003, the unit commander notified the applicant of initiation of separation action under the provisions of Chapter 14, paragraph 14-12c, AR 635-200, by reason of misconductcommission of a serious offense, for being accused of of commiting indecent acts on another Soldier, with a general, under honorable conditions discharge. On 15 May 2003, the separation authority waived further rehabilitation and...