BOARD DATE: 20 November 2014
DOCKET NUMBER: AR20140005840
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 be upgraded to an honorable discharge.
2. The applicant states he got out of the Army for all the wrong reasons. His girl friend dumped him and he desires an upgrade of his discharge so that he can get renters and life insurance from USAA.
3. The applicant provides no additional documents with his application.
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 10 June 1980 for a period of 4 years and training as a field radio repairman. He was transferred to Fort Gordon, Georgia to undergo his advanced individual training (AIT); however, he did not successfully complete that training and was transferred to Fort Dix, New Jersey to undergo AIT as a motor transport operator.
3. He completed his AIT and was transferred to Germany on 11 January 1981 for assignment to an armor battalion.
4. On 14 September 1982, the applicants commander notified him that he was initiating action to discharge him from the service under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 5-31 and the Expeditious Discharge Program (EDP). He cited as the basis for his recommendation that nonjudicial punishment had been imposed against the applicant on three occasions, he had failed to respond to repeated counseling sessions, and he had demonstrated an inability to adapt socially and emotionally to Army life.
5. The applicant elected not to submit a statement in his own behalf and declined a separation physical.
6. The appropriate authority approved the recommendation for discharge on
17 September 1982 and directed that he be furnished a General Discharge Certificate.
7. On 23 September 1982, he was discharged under honorable conditions under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 5-31h(2) for failure to maintain acceptable standards for retention and the EDP. He had served 2 years, 3 months and 14 days of active service.
8. There is no evidence in the available records to show that he applied to the Army Discharge Review Board for an upgrade of his discharge within that boards 15-year statute of limitations.
9. The Department of the Army began testing the EDP in October 1973. In a message, dated 8 November 1974, the Deputy Chief of Staff for Personnel announced the expansion of the EDP. The program provided for the separation of Soldiers whose acceptability, performance of duty, and/or potential for continued effective service fall below the standards required for retention in the Army. Soldiers could be separated under this program when subjective evaluation of their commanders identified them as lacking qualities for continued military service because of attitude, motivation, self-discipline, inability to adapt socially or emotionally, or failure to demonstrate promotion potential.
10. Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel. Paragraph 3-7a states 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 members 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 applicants administrative discharge was accomplished in accordance with applicable regulations with no violations of the applicants rights. Accordingly, his discharge and the reasons therefore were appropriate under the circumstances.
2. The evidence shows that the applicant was discharged in the pay grade of E-2 due to failure to maintain acceptable standards for retention.
3. The applicants contentions have been noted and found to lack merit when considering his repeated misconduct and undistinguished record of service. Additionally, the Board does not upgrade discharges simply to qualify individuals for benefits.
4. Therefore, since there appears to be no error or injustice in his case, there is no basis to grant his request for an upgrade of his discharge.
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) AR20140005840
3
ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
1
ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20140005840
2
ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
1
ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100012302
There is no evidence in the available records to show the applicant ever applied to the Army Discharge Review Board for an upgrade of his discharge within that boards 15-year statute of limitations. Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 3-7b, provides that a general discharge is a separation from the Army under honorable conditions. However, while a general discharge is authorized, it appears that in the applicants case a general discharge was unduly harsh under the circumstances as the...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2013 | 20130000483
Application for correction of military records (with supporting documents provided, if any). On 14 April 1982, his commander recommended his separation under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations Enlisted Personnel), paragraph 5-31 (Expeditious Discharge Program (EDP)), with his service characterized as under honorable conditions. There is no evidence indicating the applicant was any less mature than other Soldiers of the same age who successfully completed...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140007175
THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE: 1. On 12 July 1982, her commander notified her he was initiating action to separate her under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations - Enlisted Personnel), paragraph 5-31 (Expeditious Discharge Program (EDP)). Her DD Form 214 shows she was given an honorable separation after completing 1 year, 3 months, and 6 days of active military service.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090016654
On 23 January 1980, the applicants commander initiated action to discharge the applicant from the service under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations - Enlisted Personnel), paragraph 5-31, under the Expeditious Discharge Program (EDP). Army Regulation 635-5 (Personnel Separations - Separation Documents) serves as the authority for the preparation of the DD Form 214. Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 3-7b, provides that a general discharge is a separation from...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140018899
The applicant requests an upgrade of his general discharge to an honorable discharge or a medical discharge. There is no indication he applied to the Army Discharge Review Board for an upgrade of his discharge within that board's 15-year statute of limitations. The Army must find that a Soldier is physically unfit to reasonably perform the duties associated with the Soldier's rank, grade or specialty and assigned an appropriate disability rating before the Soldier can be medically separated.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002080746C070215
The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein. APPLICANT STATES : In effect, that he was suffering from alcoholism at the time of separation. Carl W. S. Chun Director, Army Board for Correction of Military RecordsINDEXCASE IDAR2002080746SUFFIXRECONDATE BOARDED20030729TYPE OF DISCHARGE(GD)DATE OF DISCHARGE19780508DISCHARGE AUTHORITYAR635-200, Chap 5DISCHARGE REASONA40.00BOARD DECISION(DENY)REVIEW AUTHORITYISSUES...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2013 | 20130015514
BOARD DATE: 1 May 2014 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20130015514 THE BOARD CONSIDERED THE FOLLOWING EVIDENCE: 1. On 14 January 1982, the separation authority approved the applicant's discharge and directed the issuance of a General Discharge Certificate. On 25 January 1982, the applicant was discharged under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations Enlisted Personnel), paragraph 5-31.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | 20110012234
Application for correction of military records (with supporting documents provided, if any). On 25 September 1978, the commander notified the applicant that he was initiating action to separate him from the service under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 5-31, under the Expeditious Discharge Program (EDP). Otherwise, a commander was required to separate Soldiers under other provisions of the regulation which in most cases resulted in an other than honorable discharge.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2004 | 2004102226C070208
The applicant requests, in effect, that his under honorable conditions, general discharge, be upgraded to an honorable discharge. On 29 April 1982, the applicant was notified by his unit commander that he was initiating action to discharge him from the Army and that he was recommending that the applicant's service be characterized as, under honorable conditions. On the date of his discharge, the applicant had completed 1 year, 7 months, and 23 days active military service.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140007001
The available records also show his unit initiated separation action, on 2 September 1982, under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations Enlisted Personnel), chapter 5, paragraph 5-31 (Expeditious Discharge Program). In an undated endorsement, the separation authority approved the unit commanders request to discharge the applicant and directed the issuance of a General Discharge Certificate. d. Paragraph 3-7b provides that a general discharge is a separation...