IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 14 July 2011 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20110000224 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 he had a difficult time adjusting and being away from home as a young teenager. He adds that he was young and immature and lacked the discipline it took to fulfill his obligations. He further states that he has now matured and looks back at the value of serving in the military and realizes the value of an honorable discharge. 3. The applicant provides no additional evidence in support of 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's military records show he enlisted in the Regular Army on 7 November 1989, at age 18. He completed initial entry training and was awarded the military occupational specialty of administrative specialist. The highest rank/grade he attained was private first class/E-3. 3. His complete discharge packet is not contained in his records. However, on 15 August 1991, the separation authority directed the applicant be discharged under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 13. He further directed the applicant be given a general discharge. 4. On 28 August 1991, he was discharged from active duty under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 13, by reason of unsatisfactory performance with a characterization of service of under honorable conditions. The DD Form 214 issued to him shows he completed 1 year, 9 months, and 22 days of creditable active service. 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 requirements and procedures for administrative discharge of enlisted personnel. Chapter 13 of this regulation, in effect at the time, provides for separation due to unsatisfactory performance when in the commander’s judgment the individual will not become a satisfactory Soldier; retention will have an adverse impact on military discipline, good order and morale; the service member will be a disruptive influence in the future; the basis for separation will continue or recur; and/or the ability of the service member to perform effectively in the future, including potential for advancement or leadership, is unlikely. Service of Soldiers separated because of unsatisfactory performance under this regulation will be characterized as honorable or under honorable conditions. 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 was discharged under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 13. In order to be discharged under chapter 13, it would have been his commander’s judgment that the applicant would not become a satisfactory Soldier, his retention would have had an adverse impact on military discipline, good order, and morale; the applicant would have been a disruptive influence in the future, and the basis for separation would continue or recur, and/or the ability of the applicant to perform effectively in the future, including potential for advancement, or leadership was unlikely. 2. He was 18 years old when he enlisted and 20 years old at the time he was discharged. There is no evidence indicating he was any less mature than other Soldiers of the same age who successfully completed their military service obligations. 3. 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. 4. Therefore, 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 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) AR20110000224 3 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 1 ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20110000224 2 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 1