BOARD DATE:	  1 October 2009

		DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20090007913 


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, in effect, that item 12c (Net Active Service This Period) of his DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) be corrected to show he completed longer than 4 months and 26 days of active service.

2.  The applicant states that he served actively from August 1984 to January 1985 and he was discharged with a general, under honorable conditions discharge because of a mental stress that he suffered in the line of duty at Fort Gordon, GA.  He adds that while in a psychiatric ward at Fort Gordon, and because of a suicide attempt, he was told by his company commander that all he had to do was sign some paperwork to be released from the military.  He was transferred to an inactive Reserve status but reported to his recruiter when ordered.  He feels that his length of time in the service should be extended to reflect that.  

3.  The applicant did not provide any additional documentary evidence in support of his request.

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 records show he enlisted in the Regular Army (RA) for a period of 3 years on 29 August 1984.  He subsequently completed basic combat training at Fort Jackson, SC, and he was reassigned to Fort Gordon, GA, for completion of advanced individual training.

3.  On 11 December 1984, the applicant accepted a summarized company grade nonjudicial punishment under the provisions of Article 15 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) for violating Article 134 [specific offense(s) unknown].  His punishment consisted of 9 days of extra duty and restriction.  A copy of this Article 15 is not available for review with this case.

4.  The applicant's records contain a history of counseling statements by several members of his chain of command for various reasons that include leaving his wallet unsecure, violating barracks standards, excessive alcohol drinking, and overall failure to adapt to a military lifestyle. 

5.  On 15 January 1985, the applicant underwent a psychiatric evaluation at Dwight D. Eisenhower Medical Center, Fort Gordon, subsequent to an overdose attempt and he was determined to have had a long history of impulsivity.  A review of his difficulties in the context of earlier behavioral patterns revealed that he had long-standing maladaptive personality traits and that his condition, in the opinion of the examiner, was not amenable to further hospitalization, treatment, transfer, training, or reclassification.  He was cleared for any action deemed appropriate by his chain of command and returned to duty.

6.  On 18 January 1985, the applicant’s immediate commander notified the applicant of his intent to initiate separation action against him under the provisions of chapter 11 of Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations – Enlisted Personnel) for entry level status performance and conduct.  The specific reason cited was the applicant's failure to adapt to a military lifestyle. 

7.  On 18 January 1985, the applicant acknowledged receipt of the separation notification in accordance with chapter 11 of Army Regulation 635-200.  He acknowledged that he understood that if the recommendation for discharge was 

approved, he would receive an entry level separation with uncharacterized service.  He further declined to consult with counsel and elected not to submit a written statement in his own behalf.

8.  On 18 January 1985, the immediate commander initiated separation action against the applicant in accordance with chapter 11 of Army Regulation         635-200 for entry level status performance and conduct.

9.  On 22 January 1985, the separation authority waived the rehabilitation requirements and approved the applicant's discharge from the Army under the provisions of chapter 11, Army Regulation 635-200.  Accordingly, the applicant was discharged on 24 January 1985.  The DD Form 214 he was issued confirms he was discharged due to entry level status performance and conduct in accordance with chapter 11, Army Regulation 635-200 with an uncharacterized character of service.  He completed 4 months and 26 days of creditable active military service.

10.  Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel.  Chapter 11 of this regulation sets policy and provides guidance for the separation of personnel because of unsatisfactory performance or conduct (or both) while in entry level status.  It states in pertinent part that when separation of a member in entry level status is warranted by unsatisfactory performance or minor disciplinary infractions (or both) as evidenced by inability, lack of reasonable effort, or failure to adapt to the military environment, the member normally will be separated per this chapter.  This separation policy applies to enlisted members of the Regular Army who have completed no more than 180 days active duty on current enlistment by the date of separation and who have demonstrated that they are not qualified for retention for one or more of the following reasons:  Cannot or will not adapt socially or emotionally to military life; cannot meet the minimum standards prescribed for successful completion of training because of lack of aptitude, ability, motivation or self-discipline; have demonstrated character and behavior characteristics not compatible with satisfactory continued service; or failed to respond to counseling.

11.  Army Regulation 635-5 (Separation Documents) establishes the standardized policy for preparing and distributing the DD Form 214.  The purpose of the separation document is to provide the individual with documentary evidence of his or her military service.  It is important that information entered on the form should be complete and accurate.  Chapter 2 of this regulation contains guidance on the preparation of the DD Form 214 and states that item 12 shows the record of service.  Extreme care is used when completing this item since post-service benefits, final pay, retirement credit, and so forth are based on this 
information.  Item 12a shows the beginning date of the continuous period of active duty for issuance of this DD Form 214, for which a DD Form 214 was not previously issued; item 12b shows the Soldier’s transition date.  This date may not be the contractual date if the Soldier is separated early, voluntarily extends or is extended for make-up of lost time, or retained on active duty for the convenience of the Government; and item 12c shows the amount of service this period, computed by subtracting item 12a from 12b.  Lost time under Title 10, U.S. Code, section 972 and non-creditable time after expiration of term of service (ETS), if any, are deducted and such time will be identified in item 18 (Remarks).

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant contends that his DD Form 214 should be corrected to show a longer period of service. 

2.  The evidence of record shows the applicant enlisted in the RA, he entered active duty on 29 August 1984, and he was released from active duty on 24 January 1985.  He completed 4 months and 26 days of creditable active military service which is properly documented in item 12c of his DD Form 214.  There is no evidence that he completed any other period of active service.

3.  The DD Form 214 is a summary of a Soldier’s most recent period of continuous active duty.  It provides a brief, clear-cut record of active duty service at the time of release from active duty, retirement, or discharge.  The applicant’s DD Form 214 correctly reflects his record of service and contains no errors.  Therefore, there is no basis for granting the applicant's requested relief.

4.  In order to justify correction of a military record the applicant must show, or it must otherwise satisfactorily appear, that the record is in error or unjust.  The applicant did not submit evidence that would satisfy that requirement.  Therefore, he is not entitled to 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)                                         AR20090007913



3


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20090007913



5


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1