IN THE CASE OF:
BOARD DATE: 5 June 2014
DOCKET NUMBER: AR20130018316
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 discharge (GD) to an honorable discharge.
2. The applicant states he would like to have his record clean. He turned 18 overseas. At the time of his discharge, he didn't realize the importance of an HD.
3. The applicant provides a copy of his DD Form 214 (Report of Separation 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 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 13 August 1974, at the age of 17 years and 4 months. He completed training and he was awarded military occupational specialty 15B (Sergeant Missile Crewman). His initial duty assignment was in Germany effective 30 January 1975.
3. On 2 October 1975, the applicant's command initiated separation action under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separation Enlisted Personnel), paragraph 5-37 (Expeditious Discharge Program (EDP)). The reasons stated were the applicant's incompetent and substandard performance of duty and his disrespect for authority. If the applicant declined to voluntarily accept the EDP separation he could be considered for a discharge under the misconduct provisions of the separation regulations. The unit commander recommended discharge with a GD
4. After consulting with counsel, the applicant acknowledged the proposed separation and voluntarily consented to the separation under the EDP. He acknowledged he had been advised of and understood his rights and waived his right to provide a statement in his own behalf. He acknowledged that if his service was characterized as general under honorable conditions he could expect to experience substantial prejudice in civilian life.
5. The discharge authority approved the separation directing the applicant be discharged with a GD.
6. On 6 November 1975, the applicant was discharged under the EDP. He had completed 1 year and 28 days of creditable service with 26 days of lost time (due to being absent without leave (AWOL)).
7. There is no indication the applicant applied for review of his discharge by the Army Discharge Review Board within its 15-year statute of limitations.
8. Army Regulation 635-200 provides the policy and sets forth the procedure for administrative separation of enlisted personnel.
a. Paragraph 5-37 of the regulation in effect at the time provided for the discharge of enlisted personnel who had completed at least 6 months but less than 36 months of active duty and who had demonstrated that they could not or would not meet acceptable standards required of enlisted personnel in the Army because of the existence of one or more of the following conditions: poor attitude, lack of motivation, lack of self-discipline, inability to adapt socially or emotionally, or failure to demonstrate promotion potential. No individual would be discharged under this program unless the individual voluntarily consented to the proposed discharge. Individuals discharged under this regulation were issued either a general or an honorable discharge.
b. Paragraph 3-7a states that an honorable discharge is a separation with honor. The honorable characterization of service is appropriate when the quality of the Soldiers service generally has met the standards of acceptable conduct and performance of duty.
c. Paragraph 3-7b states that a GD is a separation under honorable conditions issued to a Soldier whose military record was satisfactory but not so meritorious as to warrant an honorable discharge.
DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:
1. The applicant's record does not contain any details of the actions that led to the applicant's discharge.
2. However, the applicant's reported incompetent and substandard performance of duty, his disrespect for authority, combined with his period of AWOL, clearly show his service did not meet standards of acceptable conduct and performance of duty warranting an honorable discharge.
3. There is no documentation to support the applicant's contention and no rationale to support the implied conclusion that those alleged circumstances warrant the requested relief.
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) AR20130018316
3
ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
1
ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20130018316
2
ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
1
ARMY | BCMR | CY2013 | 20130006779
The applicant requests an upgrade of his general discharge (GD) to an honorable discharge (HD). On 8 January 1975, the applicant's commander informed him he was initiating action to discharge him under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations), paragraph 5-37 (Expeditious Discharge Program (EDP)), and that he was recommending he receive a GD Certificate. Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | 20110000445
Application for correction of military records (with supporting documents provided, if any). The applicant requests, in effect, that his general discharge (GD) be upgraded to an honorable discharge (HD). On 2 October 1975, the unit commander notified the applicant he was initiating action to separate him under the provisions of paragraph 5-37, Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations) under the Expeditious Discharge Program (EDP) and that he was recommending the applicant receive a GD.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2006 | 20060012610
On 13 January 1976, the separation authority approved the applicants 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. The evidence of record confirms the applicant's separation processing under the provisions of the EDP was accomplished in accordance with the applicable regulation,...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | 20110011845
The applicant requests an upgrade of his General Discharge (GD), under honorable conditions to a fully Honorable Discharge (HD). On 3 June 1975, the applicants immediate commander notified the applicant that he intended to recommend his discharge from the Army under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations - Enlisted Personnel), paragraph 5-37 (Expeditious Discharge Program (EDP)) with a GD, under honorable conditions. The separation authority approved the...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100008353
The applicant requests upgrade of his general discharge to an honorable discharge. On 19 March 1975, the unit commander notified the applicant of his intent to initiate action to separate him under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations - Enlisted Personnel), paragraph 5-37 (Expeditious Discharge Program (EDP)), with a general discharge (GD). There is no evidence that the applicant applied to the Army Discharge Review Board (ADRB) for an upgrade of his discharge...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090008115
Application for correction of military records (with supporting documents provided, if any). On 23 May 1977, the unit commander notified the applicant of his intent to initiate action to separate him under the provisions of chapter 5, Army Regulation 635-200 (Expeditious Discharge Program (EDP)), with a GD. The DD Form 214 (Report of Separation from Active Duty) issued to the applicant upon discharge on 24 June 1977, shows he was separated under the provisions of paragraph 5-37, Army...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | 20110006342
A general discharge is the separation from the Army under honorable conditions of an individual whose military record was not sufficiently meritorious to warrant an honorable discharge. The applicant's request for upgrade of his discharge under honorable conditions was carefully considered; however, the evidence of record is insufficient to grant relief in this case. ____________X_____________ CHAIRPERSON I certify that herein is recorded the true and complete record of the proceedings of...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | 20110014699
Application for correction of military records (with supporting documents provided, if any). Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel. The applicant's request for upgrade of his discharge under honorable conditions was carefully considered; however, the evidence of record is insufficient to grant relief in this case.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080005305
The applicant believes that an honorable discharge is more appropriate and more accurately characterizes his service record and being awarded a general discharge was grossly unjust. The unit commander further informed the applicant of the effects of a less than honorable discharge and the rights available to him. There is no indication in his military 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 | CY2002 | 2002067707C070402
The applicant requests that his General Discharge (GD) be upgraded to an Honorable Discharge (HD). On 20 September 1976, the applicant's company commander initiated action to separate him under the provisions of paragraph 5-37 (Expeditious Discharge Program, or EDP), Army Regulation 635-200. There is no indication that the applicant petitioned the Army Discharge Review Board (ADRB) seeking a discharge upgrade within the statutory time limit imposed by that board.