IN THE CASE OF:	  

		BOARD DATE:	  10 July 2012

		DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20110025124 


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 upgrade of his general, under honorable conditions discharge to an honorable discharge.  He also requests correction of his discharge document to show his training, security clearance or personnel security investigation status, and foreign service.

2.  The applicant states he entered the U.S. Army on 22 October 1974 at the age of 16.  He had not yet completed high school.

   a.  He completed the General Educational Development (GED) tests and earned his high school-level equivalency diploma.

   b.  He completed military occupational specialty (MOS) training, was one of the top five students in the class, and received accelerated advancement.  He also completed adventure (mountain climbing) training and served in Korea.  In addition, he was issued a confidential security clearance.  He adds that his discharge document does not show this information.

   c.  He states he was young and immature, and his poor performance started in December 1976 when he began making bad decisions.  He was influenced by others and introduced to drugs while serving in Korea.  Rather than admitting to his drug use, he asked to return to the United States in order to escape the environment.  He regrets not asking for help with his drug problem because he could have corrected it.
   
   d.  He adds that since being discharged from the Army he has stayed out of trouble and worked to improve his life.  He has earned a Bachelor of Arts degree in Computer Science, and Bachelor of Science and Master of Science degrees in Engineering Technology.

3.  The applicant provides copies of his DA Form 2-1 (Personnel Qualification Record), DD Form 214 (Report of Separation from Active Duty), and transcripts.

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 (RA) on 22 October 1974 for a period of 3 years.  At the time he was 17 years of age.  Upon completion of training, he was awarded MOS 24E (Improved HAWK Fire Control Mechanic).

3.  The applicant's DA Form 2-1 shows in:

   a.  item 5 (Oversea Service) - Korea from 19 May 1976 through 5 April 1977;

   b.  item 17 (Civilian Education and Military Schools):

* High School GED, Michigan State Department of Education (1974)
* Improved HAWK Fire Control Maintenance Course (MOS 24E2O), U.S. Army Air Defense School (1975)

   c.  item 18 (Appointments and Reductions):

* private (PV2) - 22 February 1975
* private first class (PFC) - 23 October 1975
* specialist four (SP4) - 19 March 1976
* PFC (E-3) - 2 December 1976
* PV2 (E-2) - 15 March 1977
4.  A review of the applicant's military personnel records failed to reveal a
DA Form 3027 (U.S. Army Request for National Agency Check), DD Form 1584 (National Agency Check Request), or DA Form 873 (Certificate of Clearance or Security Determination) showing the type of personnel security investigation completed or security clearance granted, or the date a personnel security investigation or security clearance was completed/granted.

5.  The applicant received nonjudicial punishment (NJP) on three occasions for:

   a.  on 2 April 1975, at Fort Bliss, Texas, wrongfully having in his possession a habit forming narcotic drug (marijuana);

   b.  on 30 November 1976, at Camp Bray, Korea, being absent from his place of duty; and

   c.  from 3 to 14 March 1977, at Camp Hill, Korea, being absent from his place of duty.

6.  On 30 March 1977, the applicant's commander notified the applicant of his intent to revoke his secret security clearance based on derogatory information that included the applicant's receipt of NJP on three occasions, unsatisfactory personal conduct resulting in non-promotable status, and failure to respond to counseling.  On 1 April 1977, the applicant signed a DA Form 2962 (Security Termination Statement and Debriefing Certificate).  The DA Form 2962 does not show any information pertaining to his personnel security investigation status.

7.  The commander notified the applicant of his intent to initiate separation action to discharge him under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations - Enlisted Personnel), paragraph 5-37 (Expeditious Discharge Program (EDP)), based on a trend in disciplinary problems, non-promotable status due to unsatisfactory personal conduct, and failure to respond to formal counseling.  The applicant was advised of his rights and separation procedures involved.

8.  The applicant acknowledged he had been advised by consulting counsel of the basis for the contemplated separation action and its effects, the rights available to him, and of the effect of a waiver of his rights.

	a.  He also acknowledged that he may expect to encounter substantial prejudice in civilian life in the event a general discharge under honorable conditions were issued to him.

   b.  He elected to submit a statement in his own behalf in which he requested early reassignment to the United States and, in the absence of such action, offered his consent to the discharge action.

	c.  The applicant placed his signature on both documents.

9.  The commander recommended approval of the applicant's separation action.

10.  The separation authority approved the recommended separation action and directed the applicant be issued a General Discharge Certificate.

11.  The applicant's DD Form 214 shows he was discharged on 6 April 1977 under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 5-37, under the EDP and his service was characterized as under honorable conditions (general).  He completed 2 years, 5 months, and 14 days of active service.  It also shows in:

   a.  item 16a (Primary Specialty Number and Title:  MOS 24E2O (Improved HAWK Fire Control Mechanic);

   b.  item 18 (Record of Service), block f (Foreign and/or Sea Service This Period): 10 months and 16 days;
   
   c.  item 19 (Indochina or Korea Service Since August 5, 1964):  "XX" in the "Yes" block;

   d.  item 20 (Highest Education Level Successfully Completed (in Years)): Secondary/High School "12" Years; College "0" Years;

   e.  item 25 (Personnel Security Investigation):
   
* block a (Type):  :None"
* block b (Date Completed):  "None"
   
   f.  item 27 (Remarks):
   
* Last Country of Overseas Assignment:  Korea
* Military Education:  Improved HAWK Fire Control Maintenance

12.  A review of the applicant's military personnel records failed to reveal any evidence that he completed adventure (mountain climbing) training.

13.  The applicant had requested the Army Discharge Review Board (ADRB) upgrade his discharge to an honorable discharge.  The ADRB determined the applicant's discharge was proper and equitable.  Accordingly, the applicant's request was denied and he was notified of the ADRB's decision.

14.  In support of his application, the applicant provides a copy of his college transcripts that show he was awarded a:

* Bachelor of Arts degree in Computer Science on 5 May 1988
* Bachelor of Science degree in Electrical/Electronic Engineering Technology on 2 May 2006
* Master of Science degree in Engineering Technology on 5 May 2009

15.  Army Regulation 635-5 (Personnel Separations - Separation Documents), in effect at the time of the applicant's separation from active duty, prescribes policies and procedures regarding separation documents.  The purpose of a separation document is to provide the individual with documentary evidence of their military service at the time of separation.  Chapter 2, Section II (Instructions for Preparing DD Form 214), contains item-by-item instructions for completing the DD Form 214.

   a.  The instructions for item 25 state "self explanatory."
   
   b.  The instructions for item 27 (Remarks) state to use this block for entries required by Headquarters, Department of the Army, for which a separate block is not available and for completing entries that are too long for their blocks.
   
   c.  There are no instructions to record certificates on the DD Form 214.

16.  Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel from the Army.  Chapter 5 (Separation for the Convenience of Government), paragraph 5-37 at the time, provides for the separation of Soldiers under the EDP who demonstrated that they could not or would not meet acceptable standards required of enlisted personnel because of one or more of the following conditions:  poor attitude, lack of motivation, lack of self-discipline, inability to adapt socially or emotionally, and/or failure to demonstrate promotion potential.  Members separated under the EDP could be awarded a character of service of honorable or general, under honorable conditions, as appropriate.

17.  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.
18.  Army Regulation 15-185 (Army Board for Correction of Military Records) prescribes the policies and procedures for correction of military records by the Secretary of the Army, acting through the ABCMR.  The regulation provides that the ABCMR begins its consideration of each case with the presumption of administrative regularity. The applicant has the burden of proving an error or injustice by a preponderance of the evidence.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant contends that his general, under honorable conditions discharge should be upgraded to an honorable discharge because he was immature and made bad decisions.  He also contends that his DD Form 214 should be corrected to show his training certificates, personnel security investigation status or security clearance, and foreign service.

2.  Considering the applicant satisfactorily completed training, was awarded MOS 24E, and promoted to SP4, his contention that he was young or immature is not supported by the evidence of record.

3.  The applicant received NJP for wrongfully having in his possession a habit forming narcotic drug (marijuana) in April 1975.  This occurred before he was assigned to Korea.  Thus, records refute his contention that he was introduced to drugs (emphasis added) while serving in Korea.

4.  The applicant's DD Form 214 shows in:

* items 16a and 27 that he completed the Improved HAWK Fire Control Maintenance course and was awarded MOS 24E2O
* items 18, 19, and 27 that he served in Korea for 10 months and 16 days
* item 20 the highest education level he had completed (i.e., 12 years of high school based on his GED diploma)

	a.  There is no evidence of record that shows he completed adventure training.

	b.  There is no evidence of record showing the type of personnel security investigation completed or the date such an investigation was completed.    

    	(1)  The evidence of record shows the applicant's commander initiated action to revoke his secret security clearance and the applicant acknowledged termination of his clearance on 1 April 1977.

    	(2)  The applicant provides no evidence that he held a secret or confidential security clearance at the time of his discharge.
    
   	(3)  Item 25 of the applicant's DD Form 214 indicates that he did not have a valid personnel security investigation status at the time of his separation.

	 	(4)  There is a presumption of administrative regularity in the conduct of governmental affairs.  This presumption can be applied to any review unless there is substantial credible evidence to rebut the presumption.  Thus, in the absence of evidence to the contrary, item 25 of his DD Form 214 is presumed correct.

	c.  In view of the foregoing, there is no basis for correcting the applicant's
DD Form 214 with respect to these items/matters.

5.  The applicant's administrative separation was accomplished in compliance with applicable regulations with no indication of procedural errors which would tend to jeopardize his rights.  The type of discharge directed and the reasons therefore were appropriate considering all the facts of the case.

6.  The applicant's military personnel records show he received NJP on three occasions and that he was discharged based on a trend in disciplinary problems, non-promotable status due to unsatisfactory personal conduct, and failure to respond to formal counseling.  Thus, the applicant's service during the period under review clearly did not meet the standards of acceptable conduct and performance of duty for Army personnel and he is not entitled to an honorable discharge. 

7.  The applicant's post-service educational achievements were considered.  However, good post-service conduct alone is not a basis for upgrading a discharge.

8.  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 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)                                         AR20110025124



3


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20110025124



2


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1