IN THE CASE OF:	  

		BOARD DATE:	  17 May 2012

		DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20110023251 


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, an upgrade of his general discharge under honorable conditions to a fully honorable discharge.

2.  He states he is very proud to have served his country and wishes he could have done more.

3.  He provides no additional evidence.

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 4 March 1975.

3.  On 31 July 1975, nonjudicial punishment under the provisions of Article 15, Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ), was imposed against him for being absent without leave (AWOL) from 23 to 27 July 1975.

4.  On 3 November 1975, he was convicted by a special court-martial of being AWOL from 17 to 26 September 1975.

5.  On an unknown date, his commander notified him of his intent to recommend his discharge under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations – Enlisted Personnel), paragraph 5-37 (Expeditious Discharge Program).  He cited the following reasons for the proposed action:

	a.  Since the applicant's arrival, he had not contributed anything to the company.  He had consistently shown irresponsibility in his commitments and failed to heed the long counseling sessions which were directed toward his improvement.

	b.  His pattern of being AWOL and writing bad checks indicated his total lack of concern for his responsibilities.

	c.  His lack of self-discipline and desire to remain in the Army indicated a general inability to adapt to the social aspects which were a part of the Army.  His attitude indicated he had no desire to serve in or remain in the Army.

	d.  On several occasions he had shown an inability to responsibly handle liquor and, as a result, he was involved in barracks fights with men in his platoon.

	e.  His lack of responsibility and self-discipline made him a detriment to the unit and the U.S. Army.

6.  A copy of the applicant's consultation with military counsel is not contained in his record.  However, he acknowledged notification of the proposed discharge and voluntarily consented to the discharge on 20 October 1975.  He initialed the form indicating he did not desire to submit a statement in his behalf.

7.  On 23 October 1975, the appropriate authority approved his discharge under the provisions of paragraph 5-37, Army Regulation 635-200, with the issuance of a General Discharge Certificate.

8.  His DD Form 214 shows he received a general discharge characterized as under honorable conditions on 29 October 1975 under the provisions of paragraph 5-37, Army Regulation 635-200.  He completed a total of 7 months and 13 days of creditable service with 13 days of lost time.

9.  There is no indication he applied to the Army Discharge Review Board for an upgrade of his discharge within that board's 15-year statute of limitations.

10.  Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel.  Paragraph 5-37 in effect at the time provided that personnel whose performance of duty, acceptability for the Service, and potential for continued effective service fall below the standards required for enlisted personnel in the U.S. Army may be discharged under this paragraph.  Member s separated under the Expeditious Discharge Program may be awarded a character of service of honorable or under honorable conditions as appropriate.  No member will be awarded a character of service of under honorable conditions under this paragraph unless given the opportunity to consult with appointed counsel.  The service of a Solider separated under this paragraph will be characterized as honorable by a commander exercising special or general court-martial jurisdiction if recommended and forwarded to the commander exercising general court martial jurisdiction.

11.  Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 3-7 currently in effect, 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.  Although a copy of the applicant's consultation with military counsel is not contained in his record, the evidence of record shows his commander recommended his separation under the provisions of the Expeditious Discharge Program based on his pattern of being AWOL, writing bad checks, lacking self-discipline, and an inability to adapt to Army life.  On 20 October 1975, he acknowledged notification of the proposed discharge and voluntarily consented to the discharge.

2.  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.  Further, his discharge accurately reflects his overall record of service.

3.  In view of the foregoing, 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 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)                                         AR20110023251



3


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20110023251



2


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1