Search Decisions

Decision Text

ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100023140
Original file (20100023140.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

		

		BOARD DATE:	  22 March 2011

		DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20100023140 


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 discharge be upgraded to an honorable discharge.

2.  The applicant states the Regional Office [presumably the Department of Veterans Affairs] requested he update his general discharge to honorable.

3.  The applicant provides his DD Form 214 (Armed Forces of the United States Report of Transfer or Discharge).

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 applicant's 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 applicant's failure to timely file.  In all other respects, there are insufficient bases to waive the statute of limitations for timely filing.

2.  The applicant's military records show he was inducted into the Army of the United States on 27 April 1971 and was awarded the military occupational specialty of food service specialist.

3.  On 8 September 1971, the applicant was arrested for larceny from an automobile.  He was released from confinement on 1 October 1971 and was returned to military control the same day.

4.  He accepted nonjudicial punishment (NJP) twice, once for failure to go at the time prescribed to his appointed place of duty and once for being absent without leave (AWOL) from 26 October 1971 to 10 January 1972.

5.  On 29 June 1972, he was convicted by a summary court-martial for being AWOL from 8 March to 28 May 1972.

6.  On 3 August 1972, the applicant's unit commander recommended that he be separated under the provisions of Department of the Army message, dated 242110Z September 1971, subject:  Extension of Qualitative Management Program (QMP) to Grades E-1 and E-2.  The applicant's commander stated he counseled the applicant concerning his possible elimination from the Army under the QMP.  The applicant claimed he had financial problems at home which disrupted his effectiveness in performing his duties.

7.  On 8 August 1972, the appropriate authority approved the applicant's separation and directed that he receive a general discharge.  Accordingly, on 18 August 1972 the applicant was given a general discharge in pay grade E-1.

8.  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.

9.  Department of the Army message, dated 242110Z September 1971, subject:  Extension of QMP to Grades E-1 and E-2, extended the QMP to include the ranks of E-1 and E-2.  The policy was designed to enable commanders to immediately separate individuals whose performance of duty, acceptability for the service, and potential for continued effective service fell below the standards required for enlisted personnel in the Army.  The policy was limited to:  (a) individuals who failed to be advanced to the grade of E-2 after 4 months of time in service; (b) individuals who failed to be advanced to the grade of E-3 after 4 months of time in grade as an E-2; and (c) individuals who were reduced to grade E-1 or E-2 who were subsequently not promoted to E-2 or E-3 within the above time frames following reduction.  Either an honorable or a general discharge was authorized for members separating under these provisions.

10.  Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations) sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel.  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 was arrested for larceny from an automobile and confined by civil authorities from 8 September 1971 to 1 October 1971, he was AWOL from 26 October 1971 to 10 January 1972 and from 8 March to 28 May 1972, he accepted NJP twice, and he was convicted by a summary court-martial.

2.  Such a record clearly shows the quality of the applicant's service did not meet the standards of acceptable conduct and performance of duty for Army personnel.  As such, he is not entitled to an honorable discharge.

3.  The Board does not change a properly-issued discharge to establish entitlement to benefits from another agency.

4.  In view of the foregoing, 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 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)                                         AR20100023140



3


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20100023140



2


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

Similar Decisions

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100022527

    Original file (20100022527.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 12 January 1972, the applicant's unit commander advised the applicant of the conditions that were jeopardizing his promotion advancement and that he could be discharged under the provisions of the Qualitative Management Program (QMP) as stated in Department of the Army (DA) Message 242110Z, September 1971, Subject: Extension of QMP to grade E-1 to E-2 with a general discharge, if he failed to demonstrate the standards of conduct and ability required of military personnel. An undated...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140013820

    Original file (20140013820.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The recommendation for separation was submitted on 24 September 1973 and the appropriate authority approved the recommendation on 6 November 1973 under the provisions of Department of the Army message date time group (DTG) 242110Z September 1971, Subject: Extension of QMP to grades E-1 and E-2, due to failure to demonstrate adequate potential for promotion advancement and directed that he be furnished a General Discharge Certificate. He was properly issued a SPN of 21U to indicate...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2013 | 20130003889

    Original file (20130003889.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Further, she had been consistently counseled on her inability to function and had continued to show no measurable improvement. On 20 March 1973, the applicant acknowledged that she had been counseled concerning her conduct and that she understood that she may be denied advancement to the rank of private first class/E-3 and eliminated from the service with an honorable or general discharge if her conduct failed to improve. Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 3-7a, states an honorable...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2004 | 2004102487C070208

    Original file (2004102487C070208.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant’s military record shows he enlisted in the Regular Army and entered active duty on 8 July 1971. On 23 June 1972, the unit commander formally counseled the applicant regarding his candidacy for separation under the Qualitative Management Program (QMP) due to his erratic performance of duty and admitted use of hard drugs. The Board determined that the evidence presented does not demonstrate the existence of a probable error or injustice.

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | 20110024035

    Original file (20110024035.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Paragraph 13-10 of this regulation provides the service of Soldiers separated under this authority will be characterized as honorable or under honorable conditions as warranted by their military records. Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 3-7a, states an honorable discharge is a separation with honor. Her record of service shows she did not meet the standards of acceptable conduct and performance of duty for an honorable discharge.

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090007751

    Original file (20090007751.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Application for correction of military records (with supporting documents provided, if any). The evidence of record shows that the applicant was AWOL for the period 1 February 1972 through 2 March 1972. 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.

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100011571

    Original file (20100011571.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    The applicant requests correction of his DD Form 214 (Armed Forces of the United States Report of Transfer or Discharge) to show the following: * An upgrade of his character of service from under honorable conditions to honorable * Award of the Purple Heart, Air Medal, Army Commendation Medal, and all other awards that he may be entitled due to his Vietnam service 2. He states, in effect, his 201 file (Military Personnel Records Jacket) should show he received the Army Commendation Medal,...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | 20110006495

    Original file (20110006495.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Application for correction of military records (with supporting documents provided, if any). On 7 April 1972, the applicant was separated with a general discharge in pay grade E-2. 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 | 2001058761C070421

    Original file (2001058761C070421.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein. APPLICANT REQUESTS: That his general discharge be upgraded to honorable. The commander indicated that promotion to the next higher grade was not contemplated and recommended that he be discharged under honorable conditions.

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090008499

    Original file (20090008499.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant requests an upgrade of his under honorable conditions (general) discharge to fully honorable. On 26 November 1971, by endorsement, the applicant's immediate commander was notified that the applicant's discharge was approved under the provisions of DA Message 242110Z Sep 71 with the issuance of a General Discharge Certificate by reason of failure to demonstrate adequate potential for promotion advancement. Army Regulation 635-200, in effect at the time, set forth the basic...