IN THE CASE OF:	  

		BOARD DATE:	        19 February 2009

		DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20080017994 


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 discharge be upgraded from general under honorable conditions to an honorable discharge.  

2.  The applicant states he served his country well, but was unfairly discharged for personal reasons, not military.

3.  The applicant provides a letter from the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA), dated 14 November 2004 and a Certificate of Appreciation, dated 4 December 1979.

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 7 August 1979 and successfully completed basic combat and advanced individual training.  He was awarded military occupational specialty (MOS) 96D (Image Interpreter).  

3.  A DA Form 4126-R (Bar to Reenlistment Certificate), approved on 15 March 1982, indicates that the applicant was barred from reenlistment for non-payment of debts for the following:

	a.  January 1981 -  Missed a car payment; failed to repay a personal loan of $300.00; and failed to settle a debt with landlord.

	b.  March 1981 - Missed a car  payment.

	c.  November 1981 - Missed a car payment and wrote five dishonored checks totaling $300.00.

	d.  December 1981 - Issued a warrant for non-payment of debts.

	e.  February 1982 - Received a Letter of Reprimand for non-payment of debts.

4.  The applicant did not desire to submit a statement in his own behalf.

5.  On 4 August 1982, the applicant’s commander submitted a request to discharge him under the provisions of the Expeditious Discharge Program (EDP). The commander based his recommendation on the fact of the applicant's inability to adapt socially or emotionally.

6.  On 10 August 1982, the applicant was advised of his rights and was also advised of the basis for his separation under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations – Enlisted Personnel), chapter 5, paragraph
5-31.  The applicant indicated that he would provide statements in his own behalf.

7.  The applicant stated that he performed his duties to the best of his ability and that he felt there was discrimination in determining his situation.  His first sergeant did not ask the nature of his problems or if he was doing anything to get them resolved.  He just said "I don't want you in my Army."  He knew that there was no way he could get a fair chance to prove he could really be a good Soldier which he had proven in the past.  The applicant stated that he was one of the best 96D's in the Army and that he just had problems managing money.  With time he felt that he would be able to manage his money as good as the next person.  
8.  On 12 August 1982, the appropriate authority approved the recommendation to administratively separate the applicant and directed he receive a general, under honorable conditions discharge under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200 for failure to maintain acceptable standards for continued military service.  On 25 August 1982, he was separated after completing 3 years and 
19 days of creditable active service.  His DD Form 214 with the ending period 
25 August 1982 shows in item 24 (Character of Service) the entry "Under Honorable Conditions (General). 

9.  Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel.  Chapter 5, paragraph 5-31, in pertinent part at the time, provided that members who completed at least 6 months but less than 36 months of continuous active service on their first enlistment and who demonstrated that they could not or would not meet acceptable standards required of enlisted personnel because of poor attitude, lack of motivation, lack of self-discipline, inability to adapt socially or emotionally or failure to demonstrate promotion potential could be discharged.  It provided for the expeditious elimination of substandard, nonproductive Soldiers before board or punitive action became necessary. 

10.  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 (emphasis added), or is otherwise so meritorious that any other characterization would be clearly inappropriate.  

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant contends that he was unfairly discharged for personal reasons, not military.  However, there is no evidence and the applicant has not provided evidence that shows he was unfairly discharged for personal reasons, not military. Therefore, there is insufficient evidence to support this argument.

2.  Records show that the applicant was separated from active duty for failure to meet acceptable standards for continued military service.  Evidence of record shows he had three of incidents of missed car payments, he had five incidents of bad check writing, he had failed to pay a personal debt, he had failed to settle a debt with his landlord, he was issued a warrant for non-payment of debts, he received a Letter of Reprimand for non-payment of debts, and he was barred from reenlistment.  Based on these facts, the applicant’s service clearly did not 

meet the standards of acceptable conduct and performance of duty for Army personnel that are required for issuance of an honorable discharge.  Therefore, the character of service for separation appears to have been, and is still, warranted.

3.  Lacking evidence to the contrary, it is concluded that all requirements of law and regulation were met and that the rights of the applicant were fully protected throughout the separation process.  Therefore, it is concluded that the applicant’s discharge was proper and equitable.

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.


															XXX
      ______________________
               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)                                         AR20080017994



3


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20080017994



2


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1