Search Decisions

Decision Text

ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140002669
Original file (20140002669.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

		
		BOARD DATE:	  30 September 2014

		DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20140002669 


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 (GD) be upgraded to an honorable discharge (HD).

2.  The applicant states he was told that after six months his discharge would be automatically upgraded.  His father had passed away and he was talked into going home to be with the family instead of staying in the Army.  He was only 18 years old at the time and didn't know the procedure.  He is trying to better himself and believes he was coerced into the separation action.  

3.  The applicant provides no supporting documentation.

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 January 1986, completed training, was awarded the military occupational specialty (MOS) 19D (Cavalry Scout), and was assigned to duty in Germany on 18 May 1986.

3.  The available record includes the applicant's Cavalry Scout Job Book which contains no indication of completion of any of the Cavalry Scout MOS duty and advancement requirements.

4.  The applicant received nonjudicial punishment (NJP) under Article 15, Uniform Code of Military Justice, for illegal possession of 12 rounds of live M-16 ammunition.

5.  On 24 April 1987, his command recommended discharge under Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 13-5, for unsatisfactory performance.  The recommendation cited a history of below standards duty performance.  He was a constant source of trouble and a serious morale problem.  On 16 February 1987, he had feigned a suicide attempt and on 7 April 1987 he received NJP. 

6.  The applicant acknowledged the proposed separation action and declined to make a statement on his own behalf.

7.  The discharge authority approved the discharge recommendation and directed the applicant be discharged with a GD.

8.  The applicant was discharged on 12 May 1987 with a GD.  He had 1 year, 3 months, and 22 days of creditable service with no lost time.  He is not shown to have received any personal awards, decorations, commendations, or citations.

9.  The available record contains no evidence of the applicant's father's illness or death.

10.  There is no indication the applicant applied for review of his discharge by the Army Discharge Review Board within its 15-year statutory limit.

11.  Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel.  It provides the following:

	a.  Paragraph 3-7a states that an HD is a separation with honor.  The honorable characterization of service is appropriate when the quality of the Soldier’s service has met the standards of acceptable conduct and performance of duty.

	b.  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. 

	c.  Chapter 13 contains the policy and outlines the procedures for separating individuals for unsatisfactory performance, and provides, in pertinent part, that commanders will separate a member under this chapter when, in the commander's judgment, the member will not develop sufficiently to participate satisfactorily in further training and/or become a satisfactory Soldier. 

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  There is not now nor has there ever been any law or regulation that would allow for an automatic upgrade of a chapter 13 discharge.

2.  The applicant's substandard duty performance, lack of completion of any of his MOS requirements, and NJP do not document that the applicant met the standards of acceptable conduct and performance of duty warranting a fully honorable discharge.

3.  The applicant's administrative separation was accomplished in compliance with applicable regulations.  The type of discharge directed and the reasons therefore were appropriate considering all the facts of the case.  No relief is warranted.

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)                                         AR20140002669



3


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20140002669



4


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

Similar Decisions

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2005 | 20050008060C070206

    Original file (20050008060C070206.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 10 February 1986, the separation authority approved the applicant’s separation and directed he receive a GD. The evidence of record confirms that the applicant’s separation processing was accomplished in accordance with the applicable regulation. As a result, the Board further determined that there is no evidence provided which shows that it would be in the interest of justice to excuse the applicant's failure to timely file this application within the 3-year statute of limitations...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | 20110019096

    Original file (20110019096.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    The applicant states, in effect, orders were published changing his primary military occupational specialty (MOS) from 19D to 11B; however, these orders were not posted in his military records until 30 March 2006. Evidence shows he served in both MOS 19D and 11B for more than a year. Therefore he is entitled to have item 11 of his DD Form 214 corrected to show he served in MOS 19D3P for three years and MOS 11B3Y for 7 years and 4 months.

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2013 | 20130004952

    Original file (20130004952.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 11 May 1989, his commander informed the applicant he was initiating action to separate him for unsatisfactory performance under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations - Enlisted Personnel), paragraph 13-2. There is no evidence showing 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 NJP he received and counseling records clearly show his service did not meet the...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2013 | 20130000585

    Original file (20130000585.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 18 August 1987, his commander notified him of his intent to initiate separation action against him under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separation - Enlisted Personnel), chapter 13, for unsatisfactory performance, for repeated NJP, failure to follow instructions, disrespect and disregard of the NCO within his chain of command, and failure to rehabilitate despite numerous counseling. On 31 August 1987, the separation authority approved the applicant's release from...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2005 | 20050017625C070206

    Original file (20050017625C070206.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    The separation authority approved the applicant's separation under the provisions of chapter 13, Army Regulation 635-200, and directed that he receive a GD. The separation document (DD Form 214) issued to the applicant on the date of his separation confirms he completed a total of 4 years, 1 month, and 16 days of active military service, and that held the rank of PV2 at the time. As a result, the Board further determined that there is no evidence provided which shows that it would be in...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080008856

    Original file (20080008856.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    The applicant requests, in effect, correction of his Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty (DD Form 214) to add his overseas service in Grenada and his completion of Sniper School. The applicant has provided a copy of a Certificate of Achievement, awarded to him by the Commander, United States Military Support Element Grenada, dated 11 February 1985, It cites the applicant for his outstanding service and achievement while assigned as a cavalry scout with the 2nd Battalion,...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2013 | 20130013361

    Original file (20130013361.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 11 January 1984, the applicant's troop commander notified him he had recommended his separation under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 13, for unsatisfactory performance. On 12 January 1984, his troop commander recommended his separation for unsatisfactory performance under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 13. The record shows he was later assigned to L Troop, 3rd Squadron, 3rd ACR, where he continued to perform in an unsatisfactory manner.

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2007 | 20070009884

    Original file (20070009884.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant requests, in effect, that his general discharge be upgraded to an honorable discharge. The applicant states, in effect, that it was a long time ago and that he would like his general discharge upgraded to an honorable discharge. 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 | BCMR | CY2012 | 20120006882

    Original file (20120006882.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Application for correction of military records (with supporting documents provided, if any). There is no indication the applicant petitioned the Army Discharge Review Board (ADRB) for an upgrade of his discharge within that board's 15 year statute of limitations, or that he ever previously applied to this Board for an upgrade of his discharge. The evidence of record confirms the applicant's separation processing was accomplished in accordance with the applicable regulation.

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2003 | 2003084240C070212

    Original file (2003084240C070212.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    EVIDENCE OF RECORD : The applicant's military records show: There is no evidence of record and the applicant has provided no evidence, which supports his contention that he was entitled to a medical separation. The applicant’s record shows that he was found medically fit for separation in October 1986 after his mental and medical examination.