Search Decisions

Decision Text

ARMY | BCMR | CY2013 | 20130011822
Original file (20130011822.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

		IN THE CASE OF:	   

		BOARD DATE:	  5 March 2014

		DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20130011822 


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 that his general discharge be upgraded to a fully honorable discharge.

2.  The applicant states that he was not doing drugs at all and while the situation took place in his room, he was not present.  He also states the paraphernalia that was found was not his.

3.  The applicant provides no additional documents with 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 enlisted in the Regular Army on 2 October 1990.  He completed his training as a cannon crewman and was transferred to Germany for his first and only assignment.

3.  The facts and circumstances surrounding his administrative discharge is not present in the available records.  However, his records contain a DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) which shows he was released from active duty on 28 February 1992 under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 13 for unsatisfactory performance with a general discharge.  He had served 1 year, 4 months, and 29 days of active service.

4.  On 6 October 1998, he was honorably discharged from the U.S. Army Reserve.

5.  There is no evidence in the available records showing he applied to the Army Discharge Review Board for an upgrade of his discharge within that board’s      15-year statute of limitations.

6.  Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the requirements and procedures for administrative discharge of enlisted personnel.  Chapter 13 of this regulation provides for separation due to unsatisfactory performance when in the commander’s judgment the individual will not become a satisfactory Soldier; retention will have an adverse impact on military discipline, good order and morale; the service member will be a disruptive influence in the future; the basis for separation will continue or recur; and/or the ability of the service member to perform effectively in the future, including potential for advancement or leadership, is unlikely.  Service of Soldiers separated because of unsatisfactory performance under this regulation will be characterized as honorable or under honorable conditions

7.  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.  In the absence of evidence to the contrary, it must be presumed that the applicant’s administrative separation was accomplished in compliance with applicable regulations with no violations or procedural errors which would have jeopardized his rights and that the type of discharge directed and the reasons therefore were appropriate considering the available.

2.  The applicant's contentions have been considered, but without being able to review the facts and circumstances surrounding his discharge his contentions alone are not sufficiently mitigating to warrant an upgrade of his discharge.  

3.  In the absence of evidence showing that an error or injustice occurred in his case, there appears to be no basis to grant his 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 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)                                         AR20130011822



3


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20130011822



2


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

Similar Decisions

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | 20110002227

    Original file (20110002227.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Application for correction of military records (with supporting documents provided, if any). The applicant requests upgrade of his general discharge to an honorable discharge. It does contain the unit commander’s recommendation for separation and a properly-constituted DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) that identifies the authority and reason for separation as Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations - Enlisted Personnel), chapter 13 (Unsatisfactory...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080018116.

    Original file (20080018116..txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Service of Soldiers separated because of unsatisfactory performance under this regulation will be characterized as honorable or under honorable conditions. 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.

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | 20110018321

    Original file (20110018321.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE: 1. The applicant requests correction of the narrative reason for his separation and to obtain his service records. The evidence of record shows the applicant was discharged under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 13, which required "unsatisfactory performance" as the narrative reason for separation on his DD Form 214.

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | 20110000398

    Original file (20110000398.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    He provides: * his DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Army) * his National Guard Bureau (NGB) Form 22 (Report of Separation and Record of Service) * his Honorable Discharge Certificate * a memorandum from the U.S. Department of Justice * a character reference letter CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE: 1. There is no evidence that he applied to the Army Discharge Review Board for an upgrade of his discharge within that board's 15-year statute of limitations. There is no...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2012 | 20120009270

    Original file (20120009270.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Application for correction of military records (with supporting documents provided, if any). His DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) shows, on 18 July 1997, the applicant was released from active duty and transferred to the USAR Control Group (Annual Training), due to unsatisfactory performance, with service characterized as under honorable conditions (general). The honorable discharge that he received from the USAR has no bearing on his active duty...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | 20110001189

    Original file (20110001189.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    However, his DD Form 214 for the period ending 17 December 1982 shows he was discharged under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 13, due to unsatisfactory performance, with a general discharge. There is no evidence the applicant applied to the Army Discharge Review Board for upgrade of his discharge within its 15-year statute of limitations. Therefore, the Board determined that the overall merits of this case are insufficient as a basis for correction of the records of the...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2013 | 20130003575

    Original file (20130003575.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant requests an upgrade of his general discharge to an honorable discharge. His DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) shows the applicant was discharged under honorable conditions (general) due to unsatisfactory performance on 12 November 1982 under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations – Enlisted Personnel), chapter 13. There is no evidence showing the applicant applied to the Army Discharge Review Board for an upgrade of...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090012121

    Original file (20090012121.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant requests that items 26 (Separation Code), 27 (Reentry Code), and 28 (Narrative Reason for Separation) on his DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) be changed. The regulation, in effect at the time, stated the reason for discharge based on separation code "LHJ" is "Unsatisfactory Performance" and the regulatory authority is Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 13. Pertinent Army regulations provide that prior to discharge or release from active duty,...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | 20110019294

    Original file (20110019294.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant requests an upgrade of her general discharge to an honorable discharge, also the rank on her DD Form 214 should be specialist (E4). The separation authority directed the applicant's separation under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 13, Section1, paragraph 13-2 with a general discharge. Although the applicant's record is void of a complete separation packet, it is presumed that all requirements of law and applicable regulation were met, and the rights of the...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2006 | 20060015065

    Original file (20060015065.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 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. In order to justify correction of a military record, the applicant must show, to the satisfaction of the Board, or it must otherwise appear, that the record is in error...