IN THE CASE OF:
BOARD DATE: 6 January 2015
DOCKET NUMBER: AR20140002203
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 discharge.
2. The applicant states he would appreciate an upgrade of his discharge to correct the record and increase his eligibility for education benefits in order to better himself and his family.
3. The applicant provides:
* DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty)
* DD Form 215 (Correction to DD Form 214)
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 21 August 1991 at the age of 18 years, 11 months, and 16 days. He completed training and he was awarded military occupational specialty 77F (Petroleum Supply Specialist).
3. Item 18 (Appointments and Reductions) of his DA Form 2-1 (Personnel Qualification Record) shows he was reduced from the rank/grade of specialist/E-4 to the rank/grade of private first class/E-3 on 7 April 1995.
4. The complete facts and circumstances of his discharge are not available for review with this case. However, his record contains a DD Form 214 which shows he was discharged for misconduct on 21 September 1995 under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 14-12b, with an under honorable conditions (general) characterization of service. The DD Form 214 he was issued confirms he completed a total of 4 years, 1 month, and 1 day of creditable active service with no lost time.
5. There is no indication the applicant applied to the Army Discharge Review Board for an upgrade of his discharge within its 15-year statute of limitations.
6. Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel. Chapter 14 establishes policy and prescribes procedures for separating members for misconduct. Specific categories include minor disciplinary infractions, a pattern of misconduct - commission of a serious offense, and convictions by civil authorities. Action would be taken to separate a member for misconduct when it was clearly established that rehabilitation was impracticable or was unlikely to succeed. A discharge under other than honorable conditions was normally appropriate for a Soldier discharged under this chapter. However, the separation authority may direct a general discharge if such is merited by the Soldier's overall record.
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. The applicant's records are void of the specific facts and circumstances surrounding his discharge. However, his records contain his DD Form 214 that shows he was discharged on 21 September 1995 under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200 for misconduct.
2. In the absence of evidence to the contrary, it is presumed that all requirements of law and regulation were met and the rights of the applicant were fully protected throughout the separation process. He provided no information that would indicate the contrary. The reason for discharge and the characterization of service appear both proper and equitable.
3. The U.S. Army does not have, nor has it ever had, a policy to upgrade discharges in order to make an applicant eligible for education or other benefits. Each case is decided on its own merits when an applicant requests a change in his or her discharge. Changes may be warranted if it is determined that the characterization of service or the reason for discharge or both were improper or inequitable.
4. In light of the foregoing, there is insufficient evidence to support 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 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) AR20140002203
3
ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
1
ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20140002203
2
ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
1
ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | 20110022594
16 February 1995, 21 February 1995, and 24 March 1995 for missing formation; c. 17 February 1995, for failure to shave on three occasions; d. 8 March 1995, for disobeying a lawful order by leaving a live fire exercise; e. 6 April 1995, for not reporting to his place of duty; f. 9 May 1995, for failure to show up at work call; g. 10 July 1995 and 10 August 1995, for writing bad checks; h. 14 July 1995, for dereliction of duty; and i. On 7 November 1995, the applicant was notified of...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | 20110024041
The applicant requests his general discharge (GD) be upgraded to an honorable discharge (HD). On 7 July 1995, the unit commander notified the applicant of his intent to process him for separation under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations Enlisted Personnel), chapter 14, by reason of misconduct (commission of a serious offense) with a GD. Therefore, absent evidence of error or injustice in the discharge process, there is an insufficient evidentiary basis to...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | 20110013953
The applicant requests his general discharge (GD) under honorable conditions be upgraded to an honorable discharge (HD). 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. 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.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2012 | 20120003825
On 29 September 1995, he was discharged under honorable conditions (general discharge) under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 14-12b, for misconduct (patterns of misconduct). He enlisted in the Army National Guard (ARNG) in October 1998 and has remained in the ARNG through continuous reenlistments. Although an under other than honorable conditions discharge was normally appropriate for a Soldier discharged under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 14, it...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | 20110000286
The applicant requests an upgrade of his general discharge to a fully honorable discharge. On 24 October 1995, the applicant's immediate commander notified the applicant of his intent to initiate separation action against him in accordance with paragraph 14-12(b) of Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations) for misconduct - a pattern of misconduct. Subsequent to this acknowledgement, the applicant's immediate commander initiated separation action against him in accordance with...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2012 | 20120005790
On 1 August 1995, his immediate commander notified him of his intent to initiate separation action against him under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations Enlisted Personnel), chapter 14, for misconduct pattern of misconduct. There is no indication the applicant applied to the Army Discharge Review Board for an upgrade of his discharge within that board's 15-year statute of limitations. Although an under other than honorable conditions discharge was normally...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080012258
IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 9 December 2008 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20080012258 THE BOARD CONSIDERED THE FOLLOWING EVIDENCE: 1. On 27 December 2007, the ADRB voted to upgrade his characterization of service to "Honorable," based on the applicant's overall length and quality of service and the time that elapsed since his discharge. Evidence of record shows that the applicant was separated from the service for misconduct (commission of a serious offense) under the provisions of Army Regulation...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2012 | 20120018249
The applicant requests upgrade of his general discharge to an honorable discharge. On 20 June 1995, the applicant was notified by his unit commander that action was being initiated to separate him under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations - Enlisted Personnel), paragraph 14-12c, for misconduct commission of a serious offense. As a result of his civil conviction, he was recommended for and approved for separation under the provisions of Army Regulation...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2012 | 20120006862
On 14 February 1995, the applicant was notified of initiation of separation action under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations), paragraph 14-12c, chapter 14 for misconduct commission of a serious offense. On 15 February 1995, the separation authority approved the applicant's discharge action under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 14, and directed the issuance of a General Discharge Certificate. His separation code and narrative reason for...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140014238
THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE: 1. Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 3-7b, provides that a general discharge is a separation from the Army under honorable conditions. ____________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.