BOARD DATE:   4 December 2012

		DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20120010085


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 the narrative reason for separation listed on his 
DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) be changed. 

2.  The applicant states, in effect, the narrative reason for separation on his discharge lists "Misconduct – Frequent incidents of a discreditable nature with military authorities."  He is stressed out over this issue because he cannot get a good job.  Some employers will not hire him.  

3.  The applicant provides three letters of support.

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 1 February 1977.  He completed training was awarded military occupational specialty 63B (Light Wheel Vehicle/Power Generation Mechanic).

3.  He served a 2-year tour in Korea and was subsequently assigned to Fort Stewart, Georgia.  He was promoted to sergeant and later reduced to specialist four (SP4).  

4.  The available records show the applicant:

* was issued three Letters of Reprimand
* accepted nonjudicial punishment (NJP) under the provisions of Article 
15, Uniform Code of Military Justice on three occasions
* was convicted by a summary court-martial

5.  On 17 July 1982, his immediate commander notified him of his intent to initiate separation action against him for misconduct.  

6.  On 17 July 1982, the applicant acknowledged receipt of the separation notification action and consulted with counsel.  He requested consideration of his case by a board of officers, personal appearance before the board, and representation by military counsel.

7.  On 3 August 1982, his immediate commander initiated the separation action.  The commander stated the applicant demonstrated a total inability to conform to the standards of a noncommissioned officer and had no further potential for advancement.  The recommendation indicates the applicant was counseled on eight occasions and had been convicted by a summary court-martial. 

8.  On 17 August 1982, the battalion commander concurred with the recommendation and added that in addition to the misconduct discussed in the basic correspondence the applicant was apprehended for driving under the influence (DUI) of alcohol twice within a single 24-hour period.  Following this, the applicant received an Article 15 for failure to repair.  Despite repeated counseling the applicant continued to engage in misconduct and should be immediately discharged from the Army.

9.  On 19 August 1982, the brigade commander recommended approval of the separation action.


10.  On 12 October 1982, the board of officers was conducted.  The applicant was represented by counsel and testified in his own behalf.  The board carefully considered the evidence and found:

	a.  The applicant was undesirable for further retention in the military because of frequent incidents of a discreditable nature with civil or military authorities.

	b.  Rehabilitation was not deemed possible.

11.  On 4 November 1982, the separation authority approved the separation action and directed the applicant be discharged under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 14, for misconduct, frequent incidents of discreditable nature with civil or military authorities, and issued a general discharge.

12.  The applicant's DD Form 214 shows he was discharged on 17 November 1982, with service characterized as under honorable conditions (General).  The narrative reason for the separation is shown as Misconduct – Frequent incidents of a discreditable nature with military authorities.  He had completed 5 years,
9 months, and 17 days of net active service this period.

13.  On 12 September 1984, the Army Discharge Review Board (ADRB) denied his request for a change in the character and/or reason for discharge.  The ADRB determined he was properly and equitably discharged.

14.  The applicant provided three letters of support:

	a.  Stacey D. H____, Manager Hub Operations, Federal Express (FedEx), states the applicant has been an employee of FedEx since 11 April 2005 and he has been found to be a highly skilled and motivated individual.  He consistently produces superior work, on time, and within budget constraints.

	b.  Lucy B. A____, the applicant's mother, states the applicant is a good person, he is a great father, and he is helpful to others.

	c.  Joseph L. F____, a friend and co-worker, states the applicant believes in getting the job done; he is very knowledgeable of his job and shares his wealth of knowledge with anyone willing to learn.  He is dependable, trustworthy, and thoughtful. 


15.  Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations - Active Duty Enlisted Administrative 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 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.  

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant contends the narrative reason for separation listed on his 
DD Form 214 should be changed because it affects his ability to get a good job.  

2.  The applicant’s administrative separation was accomplished in compliance with applicable regulations with no indication of procedural errors which would have jeopardized his rights.  

3.  The type of separation directed and the reasons therefore were appropriate considering all of the facts of the case and the narrative reason for separation that is listed on his DD Form 214 is correct.  The DD Form 214 is a summary of a Soldier’s most recent period of continuous active service. 

4.  The letters of support were carefully considered; however, they are not sufficiently mitigating to warrant relief in this case

5.  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)                                         AR20110025102



3


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20120010085



2


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1