IN THE CASE OF:	  

		BOARD DATE:  15 January 2013

		DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20120011507 


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 uncharacterized discharge be upgraded to an honorable discharge.

2.  The applicant states:

* He was 17 years old and foolishly young
* He did not understand the consequences of not obeying the rules
* At the same time it was found he had stress fractures in his hip and the Army physician thought it was caused by marching
* They told him since he missed some training and went absent without leave (AWOL) he could either take basic training again or go home
* He chose home because at the time he thought he was in love and all the foolish things young men think 

3.  The applicant provides no documentary 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 was born on 13 October 1969.  He enlisted in the Regular Army on 29 January 1987 for a period of 3 years.   

3.  Between 19 February 1987 and 10 March 1987, he was counseled for:

* Being overweight
* Failing the Army Physical Fitness Test
* Being AWOL

4.  On 27 March 1987, nonjudicial punishment (NJP) was imposed against the applicant for leaving his appointed place of duty.

5.  On 20 April 1987, NJP was imposed against him for being AWOL from 3 April 1987 to 14 April 1987.

6.  On 29 April 1987, the applicant’s unit commander initiated action to separate him under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations - Enlisted Personnel), chapter 11, Trainee Discharge Program.  The commander cited:

	a.  he had been interviewed and counseled by his platoon sergeants and other cadre members in his company and it was determined he was unfit for military service.

	b.  he demonstrated a moderate to severe adjustment reaction and did not possess the mental attitude or emotional maturity required of an individual to become a productive, competent Soldier.

	c.  he lacked any self-discipline and was resolute in his decision to be discharged at any cost.

	d.  he expressed a strong desire to be discharged from military service.    

7.  On 29 April 1987, he acknowledged notification of the proposed separation action under the provisions of the Trainee Discharge Program.  He elected not to consult with consulting counsel, not to make a statement in his own behalf, and did not request a separation physical.

8.  On 4 May 1987, the separation authority approved the recommendation for discharge with uncharacterized service.

9.  On 8 May 1987, he was discharged under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 11-3a, by reason of entry level status performance and conduct.  He completed 3 months and 10 days of creditable active service.  Item 24 (Character of Service) of his DD Form 214 shows the entry "ENTRY LEVEL STATUS."

10.  Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel.  Chapter 11 of this regulation, in effect at the time, provided for the separation of personnel due to unsatisfactory performance or conduct, or both, while in an entry level status.  This provision of regulation applied to individuals who had demonstrated that they were not qualified for retention because they could not adapt socially or emotionally to military life, or because they lacked the aptitude, ability, motivation, or self discipline for military service, or they had demonstrated characteristics not compatible with satisfactory continued service.  The separation policy applied to Soldiers who could not meet the minimum standards prescribed for successful completion of training because of lack of aptitude, ability, motivation, or self-discipline.  The regulation required an uncharacterized description of service for separation under this chapter.

11.  Entry level status is defined as the first 180 days of continuous active duty or the first 180 days of continuous active service after a service break of more than 
92 days of active service.  It further states that the character of service for members separated under the provisions of chapter 11 will be uncharacterized.  For the 
purposes of characterization of service, the Soldier's status is determined by the date of notification as to the initiation of separation proceedings.

12.  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.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant's contention he was 17 years old and foolishly young was noted.  However, age is not a sufficiently mitigating factor.  



2.  He contends he had stress fractures in his hip thought to be caused by marching.  However, there is no medical evidence to support this contention.  He declined a separation physical on 29 April 1987.

3.  Evidence shows he enlisted in the Regular Army on 29 January 1987 for a period of 3 years.  He was in an entry level status when he was discharged on 
8 May 1987; therefore, his character of service is properly reflected in item 24 of his DD Form 214.

4.  The governing regulation states that a separation will be described as an entry level separation with uncharacterized service if processing is initiated while a Soldier is an entry level status.  An uncharacterized discharge is not meant to be a negative reflection of a Soldier’s military service.  It merely means the Soldier has not been in the Army long enough for the Soldiers character of service to be rated as honorable or otherwise.  Therefore, there is no basis for granting the applicant's request for an honorable discharge.

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)                                         AR20120011507





3


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20120011507



4


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1