IN THE CASE OF:
BOARD DATE: 1 March 2011
DOCKET NUMBER: AR20100021789
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 his general under honorable conditions discharge be upgraded to honorable.
2. The applicant states he was told his discharge could be upgraded after a certain amount of time has passed. He further states an upgrade would have no effect on his benefits, just his character.
3. The applicant provided no additional evidence.
CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:
1. 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 also allows the Army Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR) to excuse an applicants failure to timely file within the 3-year statute of limitations if the ABCMR determines it would be in the interest of justice to do so. While it appears the applicant did not file within the time frame provided in the statute of limitations, the ABCMR has elected to conduct a substantive review of this case and, only to the extent relief, if any, is granted, has determined it is in the interest of justice to excuse the applicants failure to timely file. In all other respects, there are insufficient bases to waive the statute of limitations for timely filing.
2. The applicants record shows he enlisted in the Regular Army on 4 December 1984 and held military occupational specialty 13B (Cannon Crewmember). The highest rank/grade he attained during his military service was private first class (PFC)/E-3. His records show he was awarded the Army Service Ribbon, Sharpshooter Marksmanship Qualification Badge with Rifle Bar (M-16), and the Expert Marksmanship Qualification Badge with Hand Grenade Bar.
3. Between September 1985 and November 1987, he was frequently counseled by several members of his chain of command for various infractions including failing a urine test, being late to duty, failing to report, his negative attitude affecting duty performance, and failing to maintain uniform and personal appearance standards.
4. He received nonjudicial punishment (NJP) under the provisions of Article 15, Uniform Code of Military Justice, as follows:
* on 17 December 1985, failing to repair
* on 30 December 1985, wrongfully using marijuana and hashish
* on 15 January 1986, breaking restriction and unlawfully striking a Soldier
5. He was apprehended by military police on 15 January 1987 for driving while drunk and on 10 September 1987 for driving while mentally impaired.
6. On 25 November 1987, he was notified by his immediate commander that discharge action was being initiated against him under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations), chapter 13, for unsatisfactory performance.
7. On 25 November 1987, he acknowledged notification of his proposed discharge from the Army. He consulted with legal counsel and he was advised of the basis for the contemplated separation from the Army; the effect on future enlistment in the Army; the possible effects of a general, under honorable conditions discharge; and of the procedures and rights that were available to him. He elected not to submit a statement on his own behalf. He further acknowledged that he understood if he were issued a general discharge, he could expect to encounter substantial prejudice in civilian life.
8. On 11 December 1987, the separation authority approved the applicant's discharge under Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 13 and directed that he be issued a General Discharge Certificate. On 30 December 1987, he was discharged accordingly.
9. The DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) he was issued confirms he was discharged under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 13, by reason of unsatisfactory performance, in the rank/grade of PFC/E-3 with a general, under honorable conditions characterization of service.
10. There is no indication he applied to the Army Discharge Review Board for an upgrade of his discharge within that board's 15-year statute of limitations.
11. 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.
12. 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 evidence of record shows he demonstrated he could not or would not meet acceptable standards required of enlisted personnel as evidenced by the NJP he received for failure to repair, wrongful use of illegal drugs, and breaking restriction. Accordingly, his immediate commander initiated separation action against him.
2. His separation was accomplished in compliance with applicable regulations with no indication of procedural errors which would tend to jeopardize his rights. The type of discharge directed and the reason for separation therefore were appropriate considering all the facts of the case. Based on his overall record, the applicant's service did not meet the standards of acceptable conduct of duty for Army personnel. Therefore, he is not entitled to an honorable discharge.
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) AR20100021789
3
ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
1
ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20100021789
4
ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
1
ARMY | BCMR | CY2013 | 20130000585
On 18 August 1987, his commander notified him of his intent to initiate separation action against him under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separation - Enlisted Personnel), chapter 13, for unsatisfactory performance, for repeated NJP, failure to follow instructions, disrespect and disregard of the NCO within his chain of command, and failure to rehabilitate despite numerous counseling. On 31 August 1987, the separation authority approved the applicant's release from...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080018562
The applicant requests an upgrade of his general discharge to an honorable discharge. This provision of law also allows the Army Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR) to excuse an applicants failure to timely file within the 3-year statute of limitations if the ABCMR determines it would be in the interest of justice to do so. On an unknown date in August 1988, the separation authority approved the applicants discharge, under the provisions of AR 635-200 by reason of...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2006 | 20060008831
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 22 March 2007 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20060008831 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 commander's letter advised the applicant of his right to have his case considered by a board officers; to appear in person before a board officers; to submit statements in his own behalf; to be represented by...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2005 | 20050005987C070206
The applicant states that he was discharged because he was performing his duties and that it has been almost 20 years since his discharge. After consulting with counsel, the applicant elected to exercise his rights to counsel and requested copies of documents that would be sent to the separation authority supporting the proposed separation action. There is no evidence that the applicant applied to the Army Discharge Review Board for an upgrade of his discharge within its 15-year statute...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2001 | 2001058362C070421
The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein. The applicant’s records contain a copy of Headquarters, 102nd USAR Command Orders 49-26, dated 16 April 1985, which shows that he was honorably discharged from the USAR on 11 February 1985, in order to reenlist in the KSARNG. On 28 December 1987, the applicant’s commander submitted a request to separate the applicant from the KSARNG.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2013 | 20130007012
The applicant requests correction of his military service records to show his official name change, modification of his narrative reason for discharge, and an upgrade of his general discharge based on a review of his military service records. The separation authority approved the recommendation for the applicant's discharge, directed that he be discharged for unsatisfactory performance, and that he be issued a General Discharge Certificate. It states that the source documents for entering...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | 20110009843
IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 25 October 2011 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20110009843 THE BOARD CONSIDERED THE FOLLOWING EVIDENCE: 1. On 15 May 1990, the applicant's 1SG recommended to the commander that separation action be initiated against the applicant for unsatisfactory performance under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations Enlisted Personnel), chapter 13. On 10 July 1990, the separation authority approved his discharge for unsatisfactory performance under the...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080017289
On 26 March 1991, the separation authority approved the applicant's discharge under the provisions of paragraph 14-12c of AR 635-200 for misconduct with an under other than honorable conditions discharge. Contrary to the applicant's contention that he was discharged because he was falsely charged with living with the wife of his sergeant, the evidence of record shows that the applicant amassed several instances of NJP throughout his military service for various offenses ranging from minor...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090015045
IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 15 April 2010 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20090015045 THE BOARD CONSIDERED THE FOLLOWING EVIDENCE: 1. The applicants commander signed an elimination packet on the applicant for separation under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 13 for unsatisfactory performance. The applicant signed a statement indicating that he was advised he was being recommended for discharge under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 13.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2005 | 20050000545C070206
The applicant is requesting correction of an alleged injustice which occurred on 1 January 1987, the date of his discharge. On 3 October 1986, the commander submitted a request through channels to the State Adjutant General requesting that the applicant be discharged under honorable conditions under the provisions of Army National Guard Regulation 600-200, paragraph 7-10r, for unsatisfactory participation of members. On 1 January 1987, the applicant was discharged, under...