IN THE CASE OF:
BOARD DATE: 1 July 2010
DOCKET NUMBER: AR20090021934
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 reconsideration of his earlier request for an upgrade of his general discharge to honorable.
2. The applicant states that he was young, dumb, and going through some civilian problems.
3. The applicant provides no additional documentation in support of his application.
CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:
1. Incorporated herein by reference are military records which were summarized in the previous consideration of the applicant's case by the Army Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR) in Docket Number AR20090006845, on 10 September 2009.
2. The applicant has provided an additional argument that requires Board consideration.
3. The original Record of Proceedings shows the applicant entered the Army in 1987. He attained the rank of sergeant, pay grade E-5. In 1991 he accepted nonjudicial punishment for wrongful use of cocaine twice. Subsequently, he was separated under the provisions of chapter 14, Army Regulation 635-200 for misconduct. The Board determined the applicant's separation processing was accomplished in accordance with applicable regulations and that his rights had been fully protected. The Board denied his request.
4. The applicant's service records show that:
a. he was born on 27 October 1962;
b. he graduated from high school in 1983;
c. he entered the U.S. Army on 31 December 1987 at 25 years of age; and
d. he completed an 18-week advanced individual training course; a 6-week additional skill identifier course, a German language orientation course, the Primary Leadership Development Course, and the Basic Noncommissioned Officer Course while on active duty.
5. 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 minor disciplinary infractions, a pattern of misconduct, commission of a serious offense that could result in a punitive discharge, convictions by civil authorities, desertion or absence without leave. Action will be taken to separate a member for misconduct when it is clearly established that rehabilitation is impracticable or is unlikely to succeed.
6. 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 members service generally has met the standards of acceptable conduct and performance of duty for Army personnel (emphasis added), or is otherwise so meritorious that any other characterization would be clearly inappropriate.
DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:
1. The applicant contends that his discharge should be upgraded because he was young, dumb, and was going through some civilian problems at the time.
2. The applicants 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 therefore were appropriate considering all of the facts of the case.
4. The evidence of record clearly shows the applicant had graduated from high school and he was 25 years of age when he enlisted in the Army. He had completed several military schools, and had advanced to the rank of sergeant, pay grade E-5. These accomplishments do not support his contention that he was young and dumb.
5. The applicant has not provided any documentary evidence supporting his contention that he was going through civilian problems at the time, or that any such problems were not of his own making.
6. Based on his record of indiscipline, the applicant's service does not meet the standards of acceptable conduct and performance of duty for Army personnel. This misconduct renders his service unsatisfactory. Therefore, he is not entitled to an honorable discharge.
7. In order to justify correction of a military record the applicant must show 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.
8. In view of the above, the applicant's request should be denied.
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 to amend the decision of the ABCMR set forth in Docket Number AR20090006845, dated 10 September 2009.
_______ _ _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) AR20090021934
3
ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
1
ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20090021934
2
ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
1
ARMY | DRB | CY2012 | AR20120017182
That was not him and the Army is where he really wants to be. However, after examining the applicants record of service, his military records, the documents and the issues submitted with the application, there are insufficient mitigating factors to merit an upgrade of the applicant's discharge or a change to the narrative reason for separation to include the reentry eligibility (RE) code. Recruiters can best advise a former service member as to the needs of the Army at the time, and are...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2001 | 2001061854C070421
The applicant requests, in effect, that several items on his DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) be corrected. The applicant states that item 11 (primary specialty number) should reflect 4 years and 3 months; that item 12 should reflect 1 year and 10 months of overseas service; that item 13 (awards) should reflect entitlement to the Army Achievement Medal, Army Good Conduct Medal, Army Commendation Medal, Overseas Service Ribbon, Expert Infantryman Badge, and...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2001 | 2001057732C070420
The applicant requests that item 27 (Reentry Code) be changed to show the entry “RE-1”, that item 24 (Character of Service) be changed to show the entry “Honorable”, that item 11 (Primary Specialty) be changed to show the entry “11B20 2 years, 6 months”, “31U10 3 years, 9 months”, that item 14 (Military Education) be changed to show the entry “Primary Leadership Development Course, 4 wks 07/96 Class 7-96, Air Assault Course 3 wks 11/96, Team Leaders Course, 1 wk 11/96, Signal Support Systems...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100009975
The official stated that a Soldier would only be assigned to a recruiting battalion following completion of the Army Recruiter Course. While there are no available documents showing he completed the Airborne Course, his DD Form 214 shows he has an SQI of "P" indicating he completed the course. ____________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 | CY2008 | 20080017197
He was ultimately told that he could get out under chapter 14 for patterns of misconduct and that his discharge would be upgraded to an honorable discharge 90 days after his discharge. On 19 August 1987, the separation authority approved the applicants discharge, under the provisions of chapter 14 of AR 635-200 by reason of misconduct and directed the applicant be furnished an under other than honorable conditions characterization of service. With respect to the applicants education, the...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | 20110001400
The applicant requests upgrade of his under other than honorable conditions discharge to an honorable or a general discharge. There is no evidence the applicant applied to the Army Discharge Review Board for an upgrade of his discharge within its 15-year statute of limitations. His record of service shows he went AWOL for over 2 months.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | 20110016061
He also requests correction of his DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) to show the entry "YES" in item 16 (High School Graduate or Equivalent) and to reflect two awards of the Army Achievement Medal (AAM), three certificates of achievement, and that he completed the Nuclear, Biological, and Chemical (NBC) decontamination training and the Combat Medic training. In the absence of orders, the AAM Certificates provided are insufficient evidence to support...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2015 | 20150002964
The applicant requests correction of his military records by upgrading his undesirable discharge to honorable. Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations) sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel. The applicant contends that his military record should be corrected by upgrading his undesirable discharge to honorable.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090004240
The applicant requests that his general discharge be upgraded to an honorable discharge. On 22 September 1989, the applicant was discharged from active duty, in pay grade E-3, under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 14-12c, for misconduct-abuse of illegal drugs. There is no evidence that the applicant applied to the Army Discharge Review Board (ADRB) for an upgrade of his discharge within its 15-year statute of limitations.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090000019
The applicant non-concurred with the counseling, stating, in effect, that he had been in the military for 9 months and was still adjusting to military life. On 7 May 1984, the applicants commander initiated a recommendation to discharge him from the service under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, Chapter 13, for unsatisfactory performance. The commander cited the applicant's previous counseling for unsatisfactory performance and stated that all attempts to counsel and...