IN THE CASE OF:  

		BOARD DATE:  24 May 2012

		DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20110023975 


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 his general discharge be upgraded to honorable.

2.  The applicant states:

	a.  he enlisted in the Army when he was 16 years old.  He was a good Solider and was promoted to private first class.  When he was at his first duty station his mother gave him very disturbing news that his sister attempted suicide and abandoned her daughter.  His sister called him and told him she had to see him or she was going to take her own life.  His request for 5 days of leave was denied.

	b.  His platoon sergeant advised him that he could get written up for disciplinary problems and he could get out of the Army and reenlist at a later date.  He was very young and followed this bad advice so he could get home to be with his sister.  He was very young and easily influenced.  He was not aware of the impact the discharge would have on his military career and civilian life.  He blames himself for his actions, but he was not mature enough at the time to make the right decision.

	c.  It has been over 20-years and the discharge has been a source of shame.  He performed very well in his short time in the military.  He was a squad leader and was promoted twice in 8 months.  These accomplishments are not indicative of an unsatisfactory performer.  Since his discharge he has functioned with pride in civilian life achieving a college degree and actively serving in law enforcement in his community.  He was a teenager who accepted poor advice.  He did serve honorably during his enlistment and requests an upgrade of his discharge

3.  The applicant did not provide any 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 at the age of 17 in the Regular Army on 9 October 1987.  He completed training and was awarded military occupational specialty (MOS) 11B (Light Weapons Infantryman).  

3.  His DA Form 2-1 (Personnel Qualification Record) shows in:

	a.  item 18 (Appointments and Reductions) he was appointed to private first class (PFC)/E-3 effective 1 October 1988; and 

	b.  item 38 (Record of Assignments) he was assigned to Company A, 
1st Battalion, 37th Infantry, Fort Campbell, KY, effective 2 February 1988.

4.  On 14 December 1988, the applicant was informed that the company commander was initiating elimination processing because he had been repeatedly counseled for writing bad checks, failure to report for duty, improper room appearance, job performance and failure to follow proper sick call procedure.  All attempts to make him a useful Solider had failed.

5.  The company commander recommended separation with a general discharge.

6.  The applicant consulted with legal counsel who advised him of his rights and also of the disadvantages of a less-than-fully-honorable discharge, including that he could expect to encounter substantial prejudice in civilian life.  He did not submit a statement in his own behalf.

7.  The appropriate authority approved the separation and directed that a general discharge be issued.  On 4 January 1989, the applicant was discharged under honorable conditions.  He completed 1 year, 2 months, and 26 days of creditable service.

8.  There is no indication the applicant applied to the Army Discharge Review Board for an upgrade of his discharge.

9.  Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel.

	a.  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.

	b.  Chapter 13 sets forth the policy and procedures for separating individuals for unsatisfactory performance and provides that commanders will separate a member under this chapter when, in the commander's judgment, the member will not develop sufficiently to participate satisfactorily in further training and/or become a satisfactory Soldier.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant's contention that he was young and immature at the time is not sufficiently mitigating to warrant relief.  The Board notes that the applicant was 
18 years old when separated, had satisfactory completed training and promoted to PFC.  His satisfactory performance demonstrates his capacity to serve and shows that he was neither too young nor immature.

2.  The applicant's administrative separation under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 5-13, due to unsatisfactory performance was in compliance with all requirements of law and applicable regulations with no indication of procedural errors which would have jeopardized his rights.  In addition, the type of discharge directed and the narrative reason therefore were appropriate and equitable

3.  At the time of his separation, his lawyer advised him that the general discharge might hamper his employment; yet, he did not even offer a statement in his own behalf.
4.  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)                                         AR20110002275



3


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20110023975



2


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1