BOARD DATE:	  19 August 2010

		DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20100007519 


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 with a characterization of service of "uncharacterized" be changed to a characterization of service of "honorable."

2.  The applicant states he served over 180 days and left on honorable terms.  His file says he has an honorable discharge, but his DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) recorded the wrong characterization.

3.  The applicant provides no additional documentation.

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 for 2 years and 18 weeks on 30 May 1990.  He was shipped to Fort Knox, KY, and assigned to the 46th Adjutant General Battalion (Reception) for in-processing.  At that time, he experienced a "moment of truth" during which he revealed evidence of a juvenile conviction for breaking and entering.  This information was omitted from his enlistment contract and, therefore, was grounds for separation based on a fraudulent enlistment.

3.  The applicant was allowed to remain on active duty and was reassigned to Company D, 2nd Battalion, 13th Armor Regiment, for basic armor training.  He completed his training and was shipped to Germany for assignment to Company B, 3rd Battalion, 77th Armor Regiment.  He arrived in Germany on or about 22 October 1990.

4.  On 26 October 1990, the applicant went to the Mannheim Mental Health Clinic (MMHC) stating he was having problems being separated from his wife and family and was unhappy with military life.  Before being seen, he asked to step outside to smoke a cigarette.  He left without further evaluation.

5.  On 29 October 1990, 1 week after his arrival in Germany, the applicant approached his chain of command seeking a discharge because he missed his family in the United States and he didn't like the Army.  He indicated he was contemplating suicide.  His chain of command sent him to the MMHC where it was determined:

* he had no psychotic process, paranoia, phobias, obsessions, or compulsions
* he had no clear insight and demonstrated poor judgment
* he was of average intelligence
* he had recent suicide ideation with no current plan or intent

The applicant was psychiatrically cleared for any administrative action deemed appropriate by his chain of command.

6.  On 20 November 1990, the applicant's chain of command initiated separation action against him under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations), chapter 11, for entry-level performance and conduct.  The applicant acknowledged his commander's intent on the same date and on 27 November 1990 he consulted with legal counsel who explained the separation process and the applicant's rights.  The applicant waived his rights.

7.  On 28 November 1990, the applicant's separation was approved.  The applicant was separated on 4 December 1990 with an uncharacterized discharge.  He had served only 6 months and 5 days of his enlistment.

8.  Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 11, sets policy and provides guidance for the separation of personnel because of unsatisfactory performance or conduct (or both) while in an entry-level status.  It states that when separation of a member in an 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 in an entry-level status and, before the date of the initiation of separation action, who have completed no more than 180 days of creditable continuous active duty and 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
* failed to respond to counseling

9.  Army Regulation 635-200 defines entry-level status for Regular Army Soldiers as the first 180 days of continuous active duty or the first 180 days of continuous active duty following a break of more than 92 days of active military service.  It further states in chapter 3 that entry-level status separations will be uncharacterized except:

* when characterization under other than honorable conditions is authorized under the reason for separation and is warranted by the circumstances of the case
* when the Secretary of the Army, on a case-by-case basis, determines that a characterization of service of honorable is clearly warranted by the presence of unusual circumstances involving personal conduct and performance of duty

10.  Army Regulation 635-200 provides guidance on characterization of service.

	a.  Paragraph 3-7a states 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.

	b.  Paragraph 3-7b states that a general discharge is a separation from the Army under honorable conditions.  When authorized, it is issued to a Soldier whose military record is satisfactory but not sufficiently meritorious to warrant an honorable discharge.  A characterization of under honorable conditions may be issued only when the reason for the Soldier's separation specifically allows such characterization.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant joined the Army for 2 years and 18 weeks; he served 6 months and 5 days.  During that time, he expressed a dislike of the Army to the point he contemplated suicide.  His commander sent him to the mental health clinic for evaluation.  Mental health professionals cleared him for any administrative separation action.

2.  The applicant was discharged under "entry-level status performance and conduct."  The separation was proper because it was initiated on 20 November 1990 after 175 days of continuous active duty.  That he was actually separated after 189 days of continuous active duty is irrelevant.

3.  All entry-level discharges are uncharacterized unless a characterization under other than honorable conditions is warranted or when directed by Department of the Army Headquarters based on unusual circumstances involving personal conduct and performance of duty.  Neither of these conditions applies to the applicant's situation.

4.  Uncharacterized discharges carry no stigma.  They simply mean the Soldier has not served the requisite amount of time to warrant an honorable or general characterization of service.

5.  In order to justify correction of a military record, the applicant must show to the satisfaction of the Board or it must otherwise satisfactorily appear that the record is in error or unjust.  The applicant has failed to submit evidence that would satisfy this requirement.



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)                                         AR20100007519



3


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)