IN THE CASE OF:	  

		BOARD DATE:	    14 June 2011

		DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20100027088 


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 reconsideration of his previous request that his general discharge be upgraded to an honorable discharge.  He also makes a new request that his DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) show Illinois as his home of record.

2.  The applicant states the following regarding the basis for his discharge:

	a.  In regard to his alleged misuse of government vehicles which resulted in his punishment under Article 15 there was no one to ask for permission and he believes his actions were in the best interest of the Army when he drove an absent without leave (AWOL) Soldier to the military police station in a government vehicle.

	b.  In regard to the two motor vehicle accidents he was not ticketed for either of his vehicle accidents and he paid for the damages in each instance.

	c.  In regard to questionable recruiting ethics, in one instance he told a recruit who decided she did not want to go (taken to mean onto active duty) to find a replacement and it would be taken care of and admits this was not an appropriate response; and in another situation he did not tell a recruit to lie about smoking marijuana.

	d.  In regard to many of his bad evaluations, he contends that they were caused by a personality conflict between his station commander and himself.  He states the evaluations are therefore slanted and that he believes the accounts were very partial against him.

	e.  In the last year of his service he was going through a lot of anxiety and dealing with a lot of mental health issues which were written in a report.  He adds that there should be no less weight given to the enclosed document regarding his mental stability as was given all other documents in his military record.

   f.  He adds that he would like to remind the Board of the large number of documents, awards, write-ups, community relation events, and other achievements he has that reflected positively on the Army during his time of service.  He summarizes by stating it was only at the end of his career, due to mental health issues caused by his stressful job and crumbling marriage, that his behavior would warrant an early separation.
   
3.  He also states that the address in item 19 was his mailing address.  He continues by stating that while he was stationed in Wisconsin and immediately after his discharge he moved back to his home of record and lived with his parents for over a year.

4.  The applicant provides a copy of pages 2 and 3 of his DD Form 1966 (Application for Enlistment - Armed Forces of the United States), DA Form 2496 (Disposition Form), three DA Forms 2166-6 (Enlisted Evaluation Report), a recognition letter, and his DD Form 214.

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  Incorporated herein by reference are military records which were summarized in the previous consideration of the applicant's case by the Army Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR) in Docket Number AR20100000252, on 22 July 2010.

2.  His statements that he did not tell a recruit to lie about smoking marijuana, that many of his bad evaluations were caused by a personality conflict by his station commander, and that he was going through a lot of anxiety and dealing with a lot of mental health issues along with a DA Form 2496 and three DA Forms 2166-6 provided by the applicant are new arguments and new evidence, which requires that the Board reconsider his request.

3.  He enlisted in the Regular Army on 15 June 1978 for a period of 3 years.  He successfully completed initial entry training.  He was awarded the military occupational specialty (MOS) of 91U (Ear, Nose and Throat Specialist) and later awarded the MOS of recruiter.  He reenlisted on 6 March 1981 for a period of 3 years.  The highest grade he held was pay grade E-5.

4.  On 18 December 1982, he received nonjudicial punishment for violating a lawful regulation (using a government furnished vehicle for other than official purposes) during the period 25-28 November 1982.  

5.  On 7 July 1983, he received a formal letter of counseling for indebtedness.  This letter indicated he had incurred $13,000 in debt (bills) and most of his creditors were demanding immediate payment in full.  A payment plan was established by his station commander and it was strongly recommended that he follow the suggested plan.  He signed this letter and indicated "I have read, understand, and will comply with the contents of this letter."

6.  On 19 July 1983, he received a letter of reprimand for his negligent actions in the use of an official government vehicle on 15 July 1983.

7.  On 29 July 1983, he was referred for a mental status/psychiatric evaluation due to a change in his general appearance, duty performance, and being depressed over the previous 2 months.  A DA Form 3822-R (Report of Mental Status Evaluation), dated 14 September 1983, provided a diagnosis of an adjustment disorder with depressed mood, resolving.  The report indicated he had experienced considerable emotional upset as a result of serious financial indebtedness and mild marital disagreement.  The report further indicated the situation had improved markedly in the previous weeks and indicated there was never any serious suicidal ideation.

8.  On 1 November 1983, he was notified of his recommendation for separation under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations - Enlisted Personnel), paragraph 14-12b, for misconduct - pattern of misconduct.  The unit commander cited the following as the basis for the proposed action:

	a.  his inability to manage his personal finances;

	b.  his misuse of government vehicles which resulted in his punishment under Article 15 and two motor vehicle accidents;

	c.  his questionable recruiting ethics;

	d.  his attempted misuse of government health benefits by submitting claims for unauthorized and non-reimbursable medical examinations and medications which included multiple claims for eye care which exceeded the authorized limits for reimbursement; and
	e.  a frequent need for counseling concerning his personal affairs and duty performance by his chain of command. 

9.  The applicant consulted with counsel, waived his rights, and acknowledged that he might encounter substantial prejudice in civilian life if a general discharge were issued.  He also elected to submit a statement on his own behalf; however, his statement is not available for review.

10.  On 7 November 1983, a bar to reenlistment was imposed against him. 

11.  On 18 January 1984, the separation authority approved the recommendation for discharge and directed he be given a general discharge.

12.  Accordingly, he was given a general discharge on 26 January 1984 under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 14-12b, for misconduct - pattern of misconduct.  He had completed a total of 5 years, 7 months, and 12 days of creditable active service.

13.  There is no indication he had applied to the Army Discharge Review Board within its 15-year statute of limitations. 

14.  He provided copies of a DA Form 2166-6 for the rating periods of November 1981 through October 1982 and November 1982 through April 1983 which showed high ratings and excellent comments.  The DA Form 2166-6 for the period of May 1983 through January 1984 showed markedly lower ratings and comments indicating he had failed his last three physical fitness tests, had been on the overweight program for more than 6 months, and his professional standards were lacking.  The evaluation report also indicated numerous investigations had been initiated concerning his questionable recruiting practices.  

15.  Item 19 (Mailing Address after Separation) of his DD Form 214 contains the entry "P.O. Box 1** Shawano, Wisconsin 54166."

16.  His records contain a DD Form 4 (Enlistment or Reenlistment Agreement) showing his home of record as Elgin, Illinois and his place of enlistment as Chicago, Illinois at the time of his enlistment in the U.S. Army Reserve Delayed Entry/Enlistment Program and subsequent enlistment in the Regular Army.

17.  Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations) sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel.  Chapter 14 establishes policy and prescribes procedures for separating members for misconduct.  Specific categories include minor disciplinary infractions (a pattern of misconduct consisting solely of minor military disciplinary infractions), a pattern of misconduct (consisting of discreditable involvement with civil or military authorities or conduct prejudicial to good order and discipline), commission of a serious offense, and convictions by civil authorities.  Action will be taken to separate a member for misconduct when it is clearly established that rehabilitation is impracticable or is unlikely to succeed.  A discharge under other than honorable conditions is normally appropriate for a Soldier discharged under this chapter.  However, the separation authority may direct a general discharge if such is merited by the Soldier’s overall record.  Only a general court-martial convening authority may approve an honorable discharge or delegate approval authority for an honorable discharge under this provision of regulation.

18.  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.

19.  Army Regulation 635-5 (Separation Documents) provides detailed instructions for completing separation documents, including the DD Form 214.  The version of this regulation in effect at the time of his separation from active service provided for entry of the mailing address furnished by the individual at time of separation.  It did not provide for entering a Soldier's home of record on the DD Form 214.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The evidence of record does not support his contentions that many of his bad evaluations were caused by a personality conflict between him and his station commander.

2.  The mental status/psychiatric evaluation report indicated he had experienced considerable emotional upset as a result of serious financial indebtedness and mild marital disagreement.  The report further indicated the situation had improved markedly in the previous weeks and indicated there was never any serious suicidal ideation.  While he stresses that his anxiety and mental health issues and many positive documents in his record should be given no less weight than other documents in his record, many other recruiters have successfully managed their finances and the stress of the job.  He doesn't state why he feels his anxiety and mental health issues justify the misconduct which led to his discharge. 

3.  Evidence of record shows his pattern of misconduct included indebtedness, misuse of government vehicles which resulted in nonjudicial punishment and two motor vehicle accidents, attempted misuse of government health benefits by submitting claims for unauthorized and non-reimbursable medical examinations and medications, and a frequent need for counseling concerning his personal affairs and duty performance by his chain of command. 

4.  Regulatory policy in effect at the time of his separation and also the current governing regulation states that an individual separated by reason of misconduct for pattern of misconduct would normally be furnished a discharge under other than honorable conditions.  While he indicates he would like for the Board to consider his many awards, community relation events, and other achievements, evidence indicates his overall record was considered by the type of discharge he received at separation when he was given a general discharge.

5.  His record of service during his last enlistment included a bar to reenlistment and one nonjudicial punishment.  As a result, his record of service did not meet the standards of acceptable conduct and performance of duty for Army personnel.  Therefore, his record of service is insufficiently meritorious to warrant an honorable discharge.

6.  His administrative separation was accomplished in compliance with applicable regulations with no indication of procedural errors which would tend to jeopardize his rights.  Therefore, the type of discharge directed and the reasons were appropriate considering all the facts of the case.

7.  With respect to his desire to have his DD Form 214 establish his home of record as Elgin, Illinois, the regulatory policy in effect at the time of his separation from active duty service provided for entry of the mailing address he furnished in item 19.  Additionally, regulatory policy in effect at the time of his separation did not authorize the DD Form 214 to show the home of record.  As such, there is no basis for changing item 19 to show a different address from that currently shown and no provision to correct his DD Form 214 to show his home of record as Elgin, Illinois.

8.  The Board does not correct a properly-constituted DD Form 214 to establish an applicant's eligibility for benefits.  However, he may use this Record of Proceedings as verification that his military records contain an enlistment document which shows Elgin, Illinois as his home of record at the time of his enlistment.

9.  In view of the foregoing, there is no basis for granting the applicant's request.

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 to:

   a.  amend the decision of the ABCMR set forth in Docket Number AR20100000252, dated 22 July 2010; and
   
   b.  correct his DD Form 214 to show his home of record as Elgin, Illinois.




      _________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)                                         AR20100027088



3


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20100027088



2


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1