IN THE CASE OF:
BOARD DATE: 25 November 2014
DOCKET NUMBER: AR20140004463
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 under honorable conditions to honorable.
2. The applicant states it has been over 15 years since he separated.
3. The applicant provides no additional evidence.
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 5 July 1984. He completed his training and was awarded military occupational specialty 64C (motor transport operator).
3. In January 1985 he was counseled for cursing at a sergeant.
4. His records contain a DA Form 2627 (Record of Proceedings under Article 15, Uniform Code of Military Justice), dated 28 April 1986, showing nonjudicial punishment was imposed against him for breaking restriction on or about 17 April 1986.
5. On 22 May 1986, he was notified of his pending separation for unsatisfactory performance under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations Enlisted Personnel), chapter 13. His unit commander cited the following:
* he had four Article 15's
* all efforts by the chain of command to aid him in becoming a productive Soldier had met with negative results
* he had no regard for military authority and discipline
6. On 22 May 1985, he consulted with counsel, waived his rights, including his right to consideration by an administrative separation board, and acknowledged that he might encounter substantial prejudice in civilian life if a general discharge were issued. He also elected not to submit a statement in his own behalf.
7. The separation authority's action is not available.
8. On 2 June 1986, he was discharged under honorable conditions (general) under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 13, for unsatisfactory performance. He completed a total of 1 year, 10 months, and 28 days of creditable active service.
9. 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.
10. Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the requirements and procedures for the administrative discharge of enlisted personnel.
a. Chapter 13, in effect at the time, provided for separation due to unsatisfactory performance when, in the commander's judgment, the individual would not become a satisfactory Soldier; retention would have an adverse impact on military discipline, good order, and morale; the service member would be a disruptive influence in the future; the basis for separation would continue or recur; and/or the ability of the service member to perform effectively in the future, including potential for advancement or leadership, was unlikely. Service of Soldiers separated because of unsatisfactory performance under this chapter would be characterized as honorable or under honorable conditions.
b. 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. It appears the applicant's record of service included four Article 15's. As a result, his quality of service did not meet the standards of acceptable conduct and performance of duty for Army personnel. Therefore, the applicant's record of service is insufficiently meritorious to warrant an honorable discharge.
2. His administrative separation was accomplished in compliance with applicable regulations with no indication of procedural errors which would have jeopardized his rights. He had an opportunity to submit a statement wherein he could have voiced his concerns; however, he elected not to do so.
3. The type of discharge directed and the reasons therefor were appropriate considering all the facts of the case.
4. In view of the foregoing, there is no basis for granting the applicant's 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) AR20140004463
3
ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
1
ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20140004463
2
ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
1
ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090015045
IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 15 April 2010 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20090015045 THE BOARD CONSIDERED THE FOLLOWING EVIDENCE: 1. The applicants commander signed an elimination packet on the applicant for separation under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 13 for unsatisfactory performance. The applicant signed a statement indicating that he was advised he was being recommended for discharge under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 13.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090005369
The applicant requests: a. an upgrade of his general discharge under honorable conditions to a fully honorable discharge; b. in effect, correction of his separation code of "JHJ" and Narrative Reason for Separation "Unsatisfactory Performance"; and c. an upgrade of his Reenlistment Eligibility (RE) codes from "RE-3B and RE-3" to a more favorable code that may allow him to reenlist. The applicant's records show he enlisted in the Regular Army (RA) for a period of 3 years on 6 March 1984. ...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090006403
On 12 March 1986, 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. Accordingly, the applicant was discharged with a general, under honorable conditions discharge on 24 March 1986 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 | CY2015 | 20150001199
The applicant requests an upgrade of his under honorable conditions (general) discharge. In addition, his acknowledgement statement stated, "I may make application to the Army Discharge Review Board or the Army Board for Correction of Military Records for upgrading; however, I realize that an act of consideration by either board does not imply that my discharge will be upgraded." The applicant's request for upgrade of his general discharge to an honorable discharge was carefully considered.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2005 | 20050002224C070206
During February 1986 and June 1986, the applicant received three adverse counseling statements for failure to perform as an E-4 and for intent to impose separation under the provisions of Army Regulation 635- 200, chapter 13 and a bar to reenlistment in accordance with Army Regulation 601-280. The applicant's service record shows he received two Article 15s, a bar to reenlistment and several adverse counseling statements. As a result, his record of service was not honorable and did not...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | AR20080015975
The applicant requests that his 1986 discharge under honorable conditions be upgraded to fully honorable. On 13 December 1985, the applicant was notified of his unit commanders intent to recommend him for elimination from the U.S. Army, under the provisions of paragraph 13-2a, chapter 13, Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations Enlisted Personnel) with a recommendation that he be issued a general discharge under honorable conditions. Service of individuals separated because of...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2012 | 20120003494
Application for correction of military records (with supporting documents provided, if any). On 13 June 1986, his commander notified him of his intent to initiate action to effect his discharge under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations - Enlisted Personnel), chapter 13, due to his unsatisfactory performance. On 25 June 1986, he was discharged accordingly.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2005 | 20050000545C070206
The applicant is requesting correction of an alleged injustice which occurred on 1 January 1987, the date of his discharge. On 3 October 1986, the commander submitted a request through channels to the State Adjutant General requesting that the applicant be discharged under honorable conditions under the provisions of Army National Guard Regulation 600-200, paragraph 7-10r, for unsatisfactory participation of members. On 1 January 1987, the applicant was discharged, under...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2012 | 20120002049
On 13 February 1986, the applicant was discharged, under honorable conditions, under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 13, due to unsatisfactory performance, with a General Discharge Certificate. There is no evidence the applicant applied to the Army Discharge Review Board for an upgrade of his discharge within that board's 15-year statute of limitations. His record shows he was counseled on at least eight occasions and he accepted NJP due to unsatisfactory performance.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2005 | 20050008060C070206
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...