IN THE CASE OF:
BOARD DATE: 27 May 2014
DOCKET NUMBER: AR20130017084
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 an upgrade of his general under honorable conditions discharge.
2. He states his problem was never addressed.
3. He provides no additional documents.
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 19 July 1983 for a period of three years.
3. He accepted nonjudicial punishment under Article 15, Uniform Code of Military Justice on two occasions, for being absent without leave (AWOL) from 6 to 9 August 1984 and for wrongfully using marijuana on or about 22 July to 1 August 1984.
4. He was barred from reenlistment on 5 September 1984.
5. On 28 September 1984, the unit commander notified him of the proposed recommendation to discharge him under the provisions of Army Regulation
635-200 (Personnel Separations Enlisted Personnel), chapter 13, for unsatisfactory performance. He was advised of his rights. He consulted with legal counsel and did not submit statements in his own behalf.
6. On 9 October 1984, the separation authority waived rehabilitative transfer
and directed the applicant's separation under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 13, for unsatisfactory performance with issuance of a general discharge.
7. On 17 October 1984, he was discharged under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 13, for unsatisfactory performance. At the time of his discharge, he had completed 1 year, 2 months, and 27 days of active military service with 3 days of lost time.
8. His service record does not indicate he applied to the Army Discharge Review Board for an upgrade of his discharge within its 15-year statute of limitations.
9. Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the requirements and procedures for administrative discharge of enlisted personnel. Chapter 13 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.
10. 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's contention that his problem was never addressed is acknowledged. However, he had many legitimate avenues through which to obtain assistance or relief without committing the misconduct which led to his discharge. His personal problems are not sufficiently mitigating to warrant an upgrade of his discharge.
2. His administrative separation was accomplished in compliance with applicable regulations with no indication of procedural errors which would have jeopardized his rights.
3. His service record shows he received two Article 15s, for being AWOL and for wrongfully using marijuana.
4. It appears the separation authority determined the applicant's overall service did not meet the standards of acceptable conduct and performance of duty to warrant recommendation of a fully honorable discharge and characterized his service as general under honorable conditions characterization at the time of his discharge. He has not presented sufficient evidence which warrants changing the general to a fully honorable characterization of service.
5. The evidence of record does not indicate the actions taken against him were in error or unjust. Therefore, there is no basis for granting 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) AR20130017084
3
ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
1
ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20130017084
2
ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
1
ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090017307
Application for correction of military records (with supporting documents provided, if any). The applicant requests that his general discharge be upgraded to an honorable discharge. 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.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090012358
The applicant's record contains a DA Form 4856, dated 14 December 1984, which shows he was counseled by his unit commander for his poor duty performance since arriving at the unit. The applicant's record contains a DA Form 4856, dated 18 January 1985, which shows he was counseled by his unit commander regarding his unsatisfactory duty performance since being permanently disqualified from the PRP. On 28 January 1985, the applicants unit commander recommended that he be separated from the...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100028308
The applicant requests his general discharge be upgraded to an honorable discharge. He further acknowledged he understood if he received a less than honorable discharge he could make an application to the Army Discharge Review Board (ADRB) or the ABCMR for an upgrade of his discharge. _______ _ 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 | CY2009 | 20090008727
On 25 February 1985, the applicant was notified of his pending separation under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations Enlisted Personnel), chapter 13, for unsatisfactory performance. There is no evidence that the applicant applied to the Army Discharge Review Board for upgrade of his discharge within its 15-year statute of limitations. __________x____________ CHAIRPERSON I certify that herein is recorded the true and complete record of the proceedings of the...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2006 | 20060002145C070205
David Haasenritter | |Member | The Board considered the following evidence: Exhibit A - Application for correction of military records. COUNSEL'S REQUEST, STATEMENT AND EVIDENCE: Counsel states, in effect, that the evidence of record substantially supports the applicant’s contentions. Service of Soldiers separated because of unsatisfactory performance under this regulation will be characterized as honorable or under honorable conditions.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2007 | 20070013182
In her self-authored statement, dated 13 August 2007, the applicant describes her difficulties adjusting to a predominantly male Army and describes occasions of sexual harassment she encountered during her military service. The applicant was neither married nor had any children during her military service. The applicant was discharged under the provisions of chapter 13 of Army Regulation 635-200.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100011150
On 1 April 1985, at Camp Casey, Korea, a board of officers convened to hear testimony and review evidence pertaining to whether the applicant should be discharged from the Army for unsatisfactory performance. There is no record the applicant petitioned the Army Discharge Review Board seeking a discharge upgrade during that board's 15-year statute of limitations. Army Regulation 635-200 provides that Soldiers with more than 6 years of total active and Reserve military service at the time of...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2013 | 20130003806
The applicant requests correction of his records to show he was medically discharged based on an unfitting medical condition. Based on the applicant's record of service and considering his recent personal problems, he recommended issuance of an honorable discharge in the applicant's case. There is no evidence of record that shows the applicant was medically unfit for military service.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090014025
On 25 October 1984, the applicant's commander notified the applicant of his intension to separate him from the service under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 13-2 for unsatisfactory performance. On 26 October 1984, the applicants commander initiated a recommendation to separate him from the service under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 13, for unsatisfactory performance. There is no evidence that the applicant applied to the Army Discharge Review...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090000019
The applicant non-concurred with the counseling, stating, in effect, that he had been in the military for 9 months and was still adjusting to military life. On 7 May 1984, the applicants commander initiated a recommendation to discharge him from the service under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, Chapter 13, for unsatisfactory performance. The commander cited the applicant's previous counseling for unsatisfactory performance and stated that all attempts to counsel and...