IN THE CASE OF:	  

		BOARD DATE:  3 April 2014

		DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20130014135 


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 that his general discharge be upgraded to a fully honorable discharge.

2.  The applicant states he was discharged for unsatisfactory performance; however, there was no unsatisfactory performance involved.  He was having significant marital problems at the time because his wife did not like him being gone all the time.  His unit told everyone that the Army had too many people and anyone who wanted to separate should apply.  Because of his marital problems he made the decision to go ahead and separate; however, it had nothing to do with unsatisfactory performance.

3.  The applicant provides a copy of his DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty).

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 3 August 1982 for a period of   3 years.  He completed his training as a heavy anti-armor weapons crewman and he was transferred to Fort Hood, Texas on 22 November 1982 for his first and only assignment. 

3.  On 10 May 1983, the applicant’s commander counseled the applicant in regard to having expressed that he no longer desired to remain in the Army.  The applicant stated that the Army was not what he thought it would be and he felt that he would no longer make a positive contribution to the unit or the Army.  The commander indicated that the applicant has “stacked arms” and indicated he no longer desired to work and earn money in the Army.  He further indicated that the applicant’s wife was disenchanted with the Army and the amount of time he had to spend working.

4.  On 11 May 1983, the applicant’s commander notified the applicant that he was initiating action to discharge him from the service under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 13-2, for unsatisfactory performance.  He cited the applicant’s inability to conform to the standards of conduct established by the Army and the detrimental effect on morale and discipline his conduct had on the unit as the basis for his recommendation.

5.  After consulting with defense counsel, the applicant waived his rights and elected not to submit a statement in his own behalf.

6.  The appropriate authority approved the recommendation for discharge on    19 May 1983 and directed that the applicant be furnished a General Discharge Certificate.

7.  Accordingly, he was discharged under honorable conditions on 25 May 1983 under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 13, for unsatisfactory performance.  He had served 9 months and 23 days of active service.

8.  There is no evidence in the available records showing he applied to the Army Discharge Review Board for an upgrade of his discharge within that board's 
15-year statute of limitations.




9.  Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the requirements and procedures for administrative discharge of enlisted personnel.  Chapter 13 provides for separation due to unsatisfactory performance when, in the commander's judgment, the individual will not become a satisfactory Soldier; retention will have an adverse impact on military discipline, good order, and morale; the service member will be a disruptive influence in the future; the basis for separation will continue or recur; and/or the ability of the service member to perform effectively in the future, including potential for advancement or leadership, is unlikely.  Service of Soldiers separated because of unsatisfactory performance under this regulation will be characterized as honorable or under honorable conditions.

10.  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 administrative separation was accomplished in compliance with applicable regulations with no violations or procedural errors which would have jeopardized his rights.  The type of discharge directed and the reasons therefore were appropriate considering the available evidence.

2.  The applicant's contentions have been considered; however, given the comments contained in the commander’s record of counseling that led to his discharge and his short period of service, his contentions alone are not sufficiently mitigating to warrant an upgrade of his discharge.

3.  In the absence of evidence showing an error or injustice occurred in his case, there appears to be no basis to grant his 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)                                         AR20130014135



3


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20130014135



2


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1