IN THE CASE OF:
BOARD DATE: 18 June 2013
DOCKET NUMBER: AR20120021773
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 (GD) be upgraded to an honorable discharge (HD).
2. The applicant states he was informed his GD would be upgraded to an HD 6 months after his discharge from the Army.
3. The applicant provides a copy of his DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty).
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 applicant's record shows he enlisted in the Regular Army on
19 November 1979. He was trained in and awarded military occupational specialty (MOS) 13B (Cannon Crewman).
3. The record shows the applicant was advanced to specialist four (SP4/E-4) on 1 May 1981, and that this is the highest rank he held while on active duty. It also shows he was twice reduced in rank and grade to private first class (PFC/E-3) on 22 November 1981 and to private (PV1/E-1) on 9 December 1981.
4. The applicant's record documents no acts of valor or significant achievement.
5. His record is void of a complete separation packet containing the facts and circumstances surrounding the applicants discharge processing. However, it does contain a 1st Endorsement dated 24 February 1982, which shows the separation authority approved the separation under the provisions of the Expeditious Discharge Program (EDP) and directed he receive a GD.
6. On 8 March 1982, the applicant was released from active duty (REFRAD) accordingly. His record includes a properly-constituted DD Form 214 which confirms:
* he was REFRAD under the provisions of paragraph 5-31(H)1, Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations - Enlisted Personnel), by reason of "Failure to Maintain Standards for Retention under the EDP
* he completed 2 years, 3 months, and 20 days of creditable active military service
7. Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel. Paragraph 5-31, then in effect, provided the policy and outlined the procedures for separating individuals under the EDP. The EDP provided for the separation of Soldiers who demonstrated that they could not or would not meet acceptable standards required of enlisted personnel. An HD or GD could be issued under this program.
8. Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 3-7a, states 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, or is otherwise so meritorious that any other characterization would be clearly inappropriate.
DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:
1. The applicant contends he was informed his GD would have been upgraded to an HD 6 months after his REFRAD. However, the U.S. Army does not have, nor has it ever had, a policy to automatically upgrade discharges. Each case is decided on its own merits when an applicant requests a change in discharge. Changes may be warranted if the Board determines that the characterization of service or the reason for discharge or both were improper or inequitable.
2. Although the record is void of a complete separation packet containing the facts and circumstances surrounding the applicants discharge processing, it does contain a properly-constituted DD Form 214 that identifies the authority and reason for discharge. Absent any evidence of record or independent evidence provided by the applicant that shows an error or injustice in the discharge process, this document carries with it a presumption of regularity in the discharge process.
3. The applicants record documents no acts of valor or significant achievement. However, he was REFRAD under the EDP for his failure to maintain acceptable standards for retention which clearly diminished his overall record below that meriting a fully honorable discharge. Therefore, it is presumed that the GD issued by the separation authority was proper and equitable at the time and his rights were protected throughout the separation process.
4. In view of the foregoing, there is an insufficient evidentiary basis to support an upgrade of his 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) AR20120021773
3
ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
1
ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20120021773
4
ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
1
ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090002053
Application for correction of military records (with supporting documents provided, if any). There is no indication that the applicant applied to the Army Discharge Review Board for an upgrade of his discharge within that board's 15-year statute of limitations. The evidence of record confirms the applicant's separation processing under the provisions of the EDP was accomplished in accordance with the applicable regulation and that the applicant voluntarily consented to the discharge and...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100006984
Application for correction of military records (with supporting documents provided, if any). The applicant requests upgrade of his general discharge (GD) to an honorable discharge (HD). On or about 3 March 1982, the applicants unit commander notified the applicant he was initiating action to separate him under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations - Enlisted Personnel), paragraph 5-31 (Expeditious Discharge Program (EDP)), with a recommendation for a GD.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080017203
Application for correction of military records (with supporting documents provided, if any). The applicant provides his active duty separation document (DD Form 214) and Army National Guard (ARNG) separation document (NGB Form 22) in support of his application. Chapter 7 of the version of the regulation in effect at the time of the applicant's discharge provided for the discharge of enlisted members from the ARNG for continuous and willful absence from military duty (unsatisfactory...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080011368
Application for correction of military records (with supporting documents provided, if any). The separation document (DD Form 214) issued to the applicant upon his discharge shows he was separated under the provisions of paragraph 5-31, Army Regulation 635-200 (EDP), after completing 1 year, 2 months, and 11 days of creditable active military service, and accruing 28 days of time lost due to AWOL. The evidence of record confirms the applicant's separation processing under the provisions of...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2004 | 20040004945C070208
Peter B. Fisher | |Member | The Board considered the following evidence: Exhibit A - Application for correction of military records. The separation authority approved the applicant’s separation under the provisions of the EDP and directed the applicant receive a GD. There is no indication in the record that the applicant applied for an upgrade of his discharge to the Army Discharge Review Board within its 15 year statute of limitations.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2006 | 20060015665C071029
The applicant states, in effect, he entered active duty in 1981 and received a GD in 1982. On 21 July 1982, the separation authority approved the applicant’s separation under the provisions of the EDP, and directed the applicant receive a GD. The separation document (DD Form 214) he was issued shows he was separated under the provisions of paragraph 5-31 (EDP), Army Regulation 635-200, after completing 1 year and 6 days of his enlistment and a total of 1 year, 4 months, and 23 days of...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2012 | 20120008402
The applicant requests his general discharge (GD) be upgraded to an honorable discharge (HD). 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. The DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) he was issued shows he was discharged under the provisions of...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100027034
IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 2 June 2011 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20100027034 THE BOARD CONSIDERED THE FOLLOWING EVIDENCE: 1. Application for correction of military records (with supporting documents provided, if any). The applicant requests his general discharge (GD) be upgraded to an honorable discharge (HD).
ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090011529
Application for correction of military records (with supporting documents provided, if any). THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE: 1. The unit commander included a statement in the separation packet that indicated the applicant utilized his time in the 71L course trying to produce evidence to substantiate his request for a medical discharge, which was based on his claim the Army was responsible for his feet problems because he was allegedly issued the wrong size combat boots.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140008393
The applicant requests his general, under honorable conditions discharge (GD) be upgraded to an honorable discharge (HD). The DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) he was issued shows he was discharged under the provisions of paragraph 5-31h(2), Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations Enlisted Personnel) by reason of "Expeditious-Failure to maintain acceptable standards for retention." There is no indication that the applicant applied to the Army...