Search Decisions

Decision Text

ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | 20110007841
Original file (20110007841.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

		IN THE CASE OF:	  

		BOARD DATE:	  18 October 2011

		DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20110007841 


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 upgrade of his general under honorable conditions (GD) discharge to an honorable discharge (HD).

2.  The applicant did not provide a reason for his request for an upgrade. 

3.  The applicant provides no additional evidence in support of his application

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 records show he enlisted in the Regular Army and entered active duty on 25 June 1958, and he was trained in and awarded the military occupational specialty 179.16 (Air Defense Missile Fire Control Crewman).  The highest grade he attained was pay grade E-4.  
3.  The applicant's record documents no acts of valor, significant achievement, or service warranting special recognition.  His disciplinary history includes his conviction by a special court-martial on 6 May 1961, for leaving his post before being properly relieved.

4.  On 19 May 1961, the applicant was discharged accordingly.  The DD Form 214 (Armed Forces of the United States Report of Transfer or Discharge)
he was issued shows he was discharged under the provision of paragraph 2 of Army Regulation 635-205 (Discharge and Release Convenience of the Government) and Department of the Army Message 553313, dated 21 April 1961.  He received a character of service under honorable conditions and completed a total of 2 years, 10 months, and 25 days of creditable active military service.

5.  There is no evidence that the applicant applied to the Army Discharge Review Board (ADRB) for upgrade of his discharge within its 15-year statute of limitations.

6.  Army Regulation 635-205, in effect at the time, set forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel for the convenience of the government.  Paragraph 2 of this regulation provided that the separation of enlisted personnel for the convenience of the government and the type of discharge were the prerogative of the Secretary of the Army and would be effected only by his authority.  

7.  Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 3-7a, stated an honorable discharge was a separation with honor.  The honorable characterization was appropriate when the quality of the member's service generally had met the standards of acceptable conduct and performance of duty for Army personnel, or was otherwise so meritorious that any other characterization would be inappropriate.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant's contention that his GD should have been upgraded to an HD was carefully considered. 

2.  The evidence of record confirms the applicant's separation processing was accomplished in accordance with the applicable regulation.  All requirements of law and regulation were met, and the rights of the applicant were fully protected throughout the separation process.  In this case, the applicant's disciplinary history clearly diminished the overall quality of his service below that meriting a 

fully honorable discharge.  As a result, it appears to support the GD issued by the separation authority at the time.  Absent any evidence that his discharge was 
improper or inequitable, there is an insufficient evidentiary basis to support an upgrade of his discharge at this late date. 

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)                                         AR20110007841





3


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20110007841



2


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

Similar Decisions

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | AR20090003093

    Original file (AR20090003093.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Application for correction of military records (with supporting documents provided, if any). The applicant states, in effect, that the narrative reason for his discharge should be corrected to reflect “prior service injury” or “prior service injury aggravated by military service.” He indicates that although he was injured in a bicycle accident prior to entering the Army, he passed his entrance physical and was found fit for military service. The DD Form 214 (Armed Forces of the United...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080016509

    Original file (20080016509.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 5 March 1962, the applicant’s immediate commander recommended the applicant be administratively separated from military service under the provisions of paragraph 20a of Army Regulation 635-206 (Personnel Separations – Discharge – Misconduct (Fraudulent Entry, Conviction by Civil Court, AWOL, Desertion)) for misconduct. It states, in pertinent part, that item 24(1) (Statement of Service – Net Service this Period) shows the total service completed between the dates shown in item 19c (Date...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140021330

    Original file (20140021330.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant requests an upgrade of his general discharge to an honorable discharge. The wrongful use of marijuana allegation was contained in a Report of Investigation, 50th Military Police Detachment, Headquarters, Fort Amador, CZ, dated 22 March 1962. c. The Commander proposed to reduce the applicant for inefficiency under the provisions of paragraph 30d, Army Regulation 624-200. d. The applicant was instructed to acknowledge receipt of the letter and to submit any matters deemed...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2013 | 20130012447

    Original file (20130012447.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 17 March 1964, the applicant's unit commander recommended the applicant be barred from reenlistment under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200 (General Provisions of Discharge and Release of Enlisted Personnel). His record contains a DD Form 214 which shows he was discharged in pay grade E-2 on 23 April 1964, under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-205 (Discharge and Release for Convenience of the Government of Enlisted Personnel), paragraph 7, by reason of early release of...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2012 | 20120020674

    Original file (20120020674.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant’s military records are not available to the Board for review. SPN codes, in effect at the time, were issued to all discharging military personnel. Therefore, there is insufficient evidence to correct his DD Form 214 with the appropriate SPN code.

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2005 | 20050008143

    Original file (20050008143.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 31 January 2006 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20050008143 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 applicant’s records show that he enlisted in the Regular Army for three years and entered active duty on 27 July 1961. On 26 June 1964, the applicant’s unit commander recommended the applicant be barred from...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2012 | 20120004854

    Original file (20120004854.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    The available records also contain a DD Form 214 (Report of Separation from the Armed Forces of the United States) which shows that, on 13 July 1956, he was discharged under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-205 and Army Regulation 635-89, for homosexuality, with an undesirable discharge. The available evidence does not show he applied to the Army Discharge Review Board for an upgrade of his discharge within that board’s 15-year statute of limitations. Under Secretary of Defense...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100020259

    Original file (20100020259.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant requests correction of his DD Form 214 (Armed Forces of the United States Report of Transfer or Discharge) for the period ending 22 July 1964 to show he completed 3 years of active service instead of 2 years, 11 months, and 2 days. The applicant states the requested credit of an additional 29 days of active service would allow him to retire from the U.S. Army Reserve (USAR). His USAR Personnel Command (ARPC) Form 249-E (Chronological Statement of Retirement Points) shows he...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080005554

    Original file (20080005554.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Application for correction of military records (with supporting documents provided, if any). On 17 January 1963, the applicant was released from active duty with a GD, in the rank of PFC, after completing 2 years, 11 months, and 19 days of active military service. The separation authority could issue either an HD or GD based on the member's overall record of service.

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090001935

    Original file (20090001935.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant requests, in effect, that he be awarded the Armed Forces Expeditionary Medal and that it be added to his DD Form 214 (Armed Forces of the United States Report of Transfer or Discharge). Section 5 (Service Outside Continental United States) of the applicant's DA Form 24 shows that during the period he was ordered to active duty he had no overseas service. The evidence shows the applicant served on active duty for the period from 23 April 1959 through 12 April 1961 and for the...