Search Decisions

Decision Text

ARMY | BCMR | CY2015 | 20150003107
Original file (20150003107.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

	

		BOARD DATE:	  20 October 2015

		DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20150003107 


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 to an honorable discharge.

2.  The applicant states:

   a.  The maintenance unit to which he was assigned was doing war exercise.  

   b.  An officer walked by him and he forgot that the exercise was over.  

   c.  He failed to salute the officer and the officer got offended.

	d.  He has not been in any trouble since he got out of the military and he has lived as a law abiding citizen.

	e.  He had some trouble adjusting to military life and he does not believe it should affect the rest of his life or his military record.

3.  The applicant provides a copy of his 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 26 July 1977.  He completed training as a recovery specialist.

3.  The applicant was counseled on five separate occasions between 20 June 1978 and 8 December 1978 for the following:

* Failure to obey orders (two specifications)
* Disobeying a lawful order
* Failure to repair
* Leaving his worksite

4.  On 24 September 1978, the applicant accepted nonjudicial punishment (NJP) for failure to obey a lawful order.

5.  He accepted NJP on 27 April 1979 for being disrespectful in language towards his superior noncommissioned officer (NCO).

6.  On 12 June 1979, the applicant was notified that he was being recommended for discharge for inability to adapt socially and emotionally.  He acknowledged receipt of the notification and after consulting with counsel, he elected not to submit a statement in his own behalf.

7.  The appropriate authority approved the recommendation for discharge on 22 June 1979 and directed the issuance of a General Discharge Certificate.  On 28 June 1979, the applicant was discharged under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations – Enlisted Personnel), paragraph 5-31, under the expeditious discharge program (EDP).

8.  There is no evidence that the applicant ever applied to the Army Discharge Review Board for an upgrade of his discharge.

9.  Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel.  Paragraph 5-31, then in effect, provided the policy and outlined the procedures for separating individuals under the EDP.  The EDP provided for the separation of Soldiers who demonstrated that they could not or would not meet acceptable standards required of enlisted personnel.  An honorable discharge or a general discharge could be issued under this program. 

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The evidence shows the applicant accepted NJP for failure to obey a lawful order and for being disrespectful in language towards his superior NCO.  He was also counseled on five separate occasions for his acts of misconduct.

2.  The EDP provided for the separation of Soldiers who demonstrated that they could not or would not meet acceptable standards required of enlisted personnel. An honorable discharge or a general discharge could be issued under this program.  

3.  The applicant has not shown error or injustice in the character of service he received as his service was not fully honorable.  He is commended for his post-service conduct.  However, it is an insufficient justification for granting 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)                                         AR20150003107





3


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20150003107



3


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

Similar Decisions

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2007 | 20070005167C071029

    Original file (20070005167C071029.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 29 March 1979, the separation authority approved the applicant’s separation under the provisions of the EDP, and directed the applicant receive a GD. The separation document (DD Form 214) he was issued shows he was separated under the provisions of paragraph 5-31, Army Regulation 635-200 (EDP) after completing 1 year, 5 months and 9 days of active military service, and accruing 10 days of time lost due to AWOL. The evidence of record confirms the applicant's separation processing under...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140005127

    Original file (20140005127.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant's unit commander notified him of his proposed discharge action under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations - Enlisted Personnel), chapter 13 for misconduct. His service record does not indicate he applied to the Army Discharge Review Board for an upgrade of his discharge within its 15-year statute of limitations. His service record shows he received three Article 15s for being absent from his unit, being AWOL for 17 days, and for failing to go at...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100026813

    Original file (20100026813.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE: 1. The applicant requests that his general discharge be upgraded to an honorable discharge. On 23 September 1977, his commander informed him that he was initiating action to discharge him under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations – Enlisted Personnel), paragraph 5-37, under the Expeditious Discharge Program (EDP).

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2015 | 20150001134

    Original file (20150001134.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant requests correction of his military records by upgrading his general discharge to an honorable discharge. On 20 May 1982, the separation authority approved the applicant's recommendation for separation under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 5-31, and directed the applicant be furnished a DD Form 257A (General Discharge Certificate). Accordingly, on 28 May 1982, the applicant was discharged.

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | 20110014951

    Original file (20110014951.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant requests correction of his records to show he was medically discharged vice being discharged under the expeditious discharge program for failure to maintain acceptable standards. His DD Form 214 shows he was discharged under the provisions of Army Regulations 635-200, paragraph 5-31, EDP, due to failure to maintain acceptable standards for retention with a general discharge. _______ _ _X______ ___ CHAIRPERSON I certify that herein is recorded the true and complete record of...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2013 | 20130002909

    Original file (20130002909.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant requests an upgrade of his general discharge to an honorable discharge. The applicant’s request to upgrade his general discharge to an honorable discharge was carefully considered and it was determined there is insufficient evidence to support his request. Records show the applicant was separated from active duty for failure to meet acceptable standards for continued military service.

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | 20110023879

    Original file (20110023879.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 8 May 1979, the applicant‘s company commander notified the applicant that he was initiating action to discharge the applicant under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 5-31, under the Expeditious Discharge Program (EDP), with a general discharge. He was discharged from active duty, in pay grade E-2, on 28 September 1979, under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 5-31, with a general discharge. Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 3-7a, stated an honorable...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140004293

    Original file (20140004293.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Application for correction of military records (with supporting documents provided, if any). Also, an Article 15 that shows he committed an assault, but this Article 15 shows he received 30 days restriction, a forfeiture of $100 for one month, and extra duty. His service record is void of medical documentation which indicates he was diagnosed with PTSD or any other mental condition while on active duty.

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100010978

    Original file (20100010978.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    He also states he was advised he could request an upgrade of his discharge to honorable 6 months after his discharge date. The commander also informed him that he intended to recommend he receive a General Discharge Certificate and advised him of his rights to consult with legal counsel to discuss the ramifications of this recommendation and to submit a statement in his own behalf, to decline the discharge, or to waive any of the aforementioned rights. On 2 January 1979, the separation...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002073141C070403

    Original file (2002073141C070403.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    He was returned to Fort Myer on 11 October and on 13 October 1978, the suspended portion of his punishment for the NJP imposed on 27 July 1978 was vacated and he was reduced to the pay grade of E-3. On 9 January 1979, the applicant’s commander initiated action to separate the applicant from the service under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 5-31 and the Expeditious Discharge Program (EDP). Soldiers had to consent to separation under this program in order for commanders...