IN THE CASE OF: 

		BOARD DATE:	  6 March 2014

		DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20130012215 


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 a fully honorable discharge.

2.  The applicant states he no longer drinks and he needs his discharge upgraded so he can receive the services he requires.

3.  The applicant provides no additional 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 enlisted in the Regular Army on 21 July 1981.

3.  The applicant was counseled by his immediate commander on 13 January 1984 for deficiencies in his duty performance, conduct, and overall behavior.

4.  A Checklist for Screening Records contained in the applicant's file shows he received disciplinary action under Article 15 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) on:

* 8 February 1984, for unsoldierly conduct
* 27 June and 26 July 1984 for failure to repair
* 8 February 1985, for failure to repair

This form also shows he was absent without leave (AWOL) for the period            28 June to 9 July 1984.

5.  Evidence shows the applicant was apprehended by military police at Fort Bragg, NC, on:

   a.  22 November 1984, for driving while impaired and reckless and careless driving by speeding for which he received a General Officer Letter of Reprimand (GOLOR) on 4 January 1985; and

   b.  7 March 1985, for driving while impaired.

6.  On 8 May 1985, the applicant's immediate commander notified the applicant of his intent to initiate separation action against him in accordance with chapter  14 of Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations) for misconduct.  The specific basis of the recommendation was the applicant's two arrests for driving while impaired.

7.  On 8 May 1985, the applicant acknowledged receipt of the commander's intent to separate him.  He consulted with legal counsel, and was advised of the basis for the contemplated separation for misconduct, the type of discharge he could receive and its effect on further enlistment or reenlistment, the possible effects of this discharge, and of the procedures/rights that were available to him.  He offered statements in his own behalf; however, none were present in the record.

8.  The applicant further indicated he understood that he could expect to encounter substantial prejudice in civilian life if a general discharge under honorable conditions was issued to him.

9.  On 7 June 1985, the applicant's immediate commander initiated separation action against him in accordance with chapter 14-12(c) of Army Regulation     635-200 for misconduct – commission of a serious offense.  The immediate commander remarked that the applicant had repeated arrests for driving while impaired and his satisfactory duty performance did not outweigh the negative impact on his alcohol usage on the morale, welfare and discipline of the unit.

10.  The applicant's intermediate commander reviewed the recommended separation action and recommended approval of the applicant's discharge.

11.  Consistent with the chain of command's recommendations and subsequent to a legal review for sufficiency, on 25 June 1985, the separation authority approved the applicant's discharge under the provisions of chapter 14 of Army Regulation 635-200 by reason of misconduct (commission of a serious offense) and directed he be issued a General Discharge Certificate.  On 15 July 1985, the applicant was accordingly discharged.

12. The DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) he was issued confirms he was discharged under the provisions of chapter 14 of Army Regulation 635-200 by reason of misconduct (commission of a serious offense) with a character of service of under honorable conditions (general).  This form further shows he completed a total of 3 years, 11 months, and 13 days of creditable active military service with time lost for the period 28 June through      9 July 1984. 

13.  There is no indication that the applicant applied to the Army Discharge Review Board for an upgrade of his discharge within that board's 15-year statute of limitations.

14.  Army Regulation 635-200, in effect at the time, set forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel.  Chapter 14 established policy and prescribed procedures for separating members for misconduct.  Specific categories included frequent incidents of a discreditable nature with civil or military authorities, an established pattern for shirking, an established pattern showing dishonorable failure to pay just debts, and an established pattern showing dishonorable failure to contribute adequate support to dependents.  A discharge under other than honorable conditions was normally appropriate for a Soldier discharged for acts or patterns of misconduct.  However, the discharge authority may direct an honorable or general discharge if such was merited by the Soldier's overall record.

15.  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 contends that his discharge should be upgraded from general under honorable conditions to fully honorable.

2.  The applicant's record of service shows that he accepted nonjudicial punishment under the provisions of Article 15 of the UCMJ on more than one occasion, was counseled for his deficiencies, received a GOLOR, went AWOL, and was arrested twice for driving while impaired.  Accordingly, his chain of command initiated separation action against him.  All requirements of law and regulation were met and the rights of the applicant were fully protected throughout the separation process.

3.  The applicant's discharge was appropriate because the quality of his service was not consistent with the Army standards of acceptable personal conduct and performance of duty by military personnel.  The applicant's repeated misconduct and failure to respond to counseling by the chain of command diminished the quality of his service.  Therefore, he is not entitled to the requested relief.

4.  In addition, the ABCMR does not grant requests for an upgrade of discharges solely for the purpose of making the applicant eligible for veteran's benefits.
 
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)                                         AR20130012215





3


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20130012215



2


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1