BOARD DATE:	  1 August 2013

		DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20130001014 


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 an upgrade of his general discharge to an honorable discharge.

2.  The applicant states he was under the understanding that his discharge was an honorable discharge.  During "elderly planning," he was recently told that the honorable conditions terminology is no longer acknowledged.  In planning for his future he wishes to be laid to rest in a veteran's cemetery.

3.  The applicant provides no supporting 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 in the Regular Army on 9 September 1974.  He completed training and was awarded military occupational specialty 35E (Radio and Communications Security Repairer).

3.  The applicant accepted nonjudicial punishment (NJP) under the provisions of Article 15, Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) on 8 January 1976 for failing to obey a lawful regulation (failure to register a privately owned vehicle) and being absent without leave (AWOL).

4.  On 9 January 1976, his unit commander initiated separation proceedings under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations – Enlisted Personnel), paragraph 5-37 (Expeditious Discharge Program), with a recommendation for a general discharge.  The unit commander stated the applicant displayed poor attitude, a lack of motivation, and an inability to adapt socially or emotionally to military life.  He was described as apathetic in the performance of his duties and obligations.  He had been counseled on numerous occasions.  On 23 April 1975 he was arrested by civilian authorities and convicted of two counts of larceny.  While he was living off post he failed to have a telephone connected.  When he did get a telephone it was illegally connected and removed by the phone company.  His personal appearance had declined and he failed to pay his just debts.  He continually displayed poor judgment and immaturity.

5.  After consulting with counsel, the applicant acknowledged the proposed separation action and voluntarily consented to the discharge.  He waived his rights to submit a statement on his own behalf and to appear before or have his case heard by a board of officers.

6.  The discharge authority approved the separation and characterization of service.

7.  The applicant was discharged with a general discharge on 30 January 1976.  He had 1 year, 4 months, and 19 days of creditable active service with 3 days of time lost.

8.  Army Regulation 635-200 provides the policy and sets forth the procedure for administrative separation of enlisted personnel.

	a.  Chapter 5, paragraph 5-37, in effect at the time, provided for the Expeditious Discharge Program.  This program provided that an individual who had completed at least 6 months, but less than 36 months of active duty and who 

demonstrated (by poor attitude, lack of motivation, lack of self-discipline, inability to adapt socially or emotionally or failure to demonstrate promotion potential) that they could not or would not meet acceptable standards could be separated.  Such personnel were issued a general or honorable discharge, as appropriate, except that a recommendation for a general discharge had to be initiated by the immediate commander and the individual had to consult with legal counsel.

	b.  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 discharge proceedings were conducted in accordance with law and regulations applicable at the time.  The character of the discharge is commensurate with the applicant's overall record of military service.

2.  The applicant was separated based on poor attitude, lack of motivation, an inability to adapt socially or emotionally to military life, and apathy in the performance of his duties and obligations.  These traits do not meet the standards of acceptable conduct and performance of duty warranting an honorable discharge.

3.  A general discharge was and is a valid designation of service.  The applicant has not provided any evidence that he has been denied any benefit or consideration as a veteran based on the terminology utilized on his discharge document.  Even if he had been, this in and of itself does not warrant upgrading his discharge.

4.  In view of the foregoing, there is no basis for granting his 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 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)                                         AR20130001014



3


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20130001014



2


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1