IN THE CASE OF:	  TAYLOR, WILLIE P. 

		BOARD DATE:	  3 June 2014

		DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20130017719 


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 upgrade of his under other than honorable conditions discharge.  

2.  The applicant states he was young and unwise and he made some poor choices but he has tried very hard to do the right thing.  He needs to able to tell his son how much he liked the Army but there is always the problem of his discharge.  

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 was born on 28 April 1959.  He enlisted in the Regular Army on 7 February 1978 at the age of 18 years, 9 months, and 10 days.  He was awarded military occupational specialty 76Y (Unit Supply Specialist) upon completion of initial entry training.  

3.  He accepted nonjudicial (NJP) punishment on:

	a.  18 October 1978 for sleeping while on guard duty;

	b.  4 January 1979 for being absent without leave (AWOL) during the period 
22-27 December 1978;

	c.  13 March 1979 for failing to go at the time prescribed to his appointed place of duty;

	d.  23 April 1979 for failing to go at the time prescribed to his appointed place of duty and for being AWOL for one day;

	e.  27 May 1979 for failing to go at the time prescribed to his appointed place of duty;

	f.  9 August 1979 for wrongfully having in his possession one once more or less of marijuana;

	g.  29 November 1979 for being AWOL for one day and for disrespect toward his superior noncommissioned officer.  

4.  His military records includes a bar to reenlistment certificate that shows he was counseled on several occasions for infractions that include being absent from duty, sleeping on duty, failing to get a haircut, and smoking in the motor pool.  

5.  His record is void of a separation packet containing the specific facts and circumstances surrounding his separation processing.  The record does contain a DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) that identifies the authority for his separation as Army Regulation 635-200 (Separations Enlisted Personnel), paragraph 14-33b by reason of misconduct-frequent incidents of a discreditable nature with authorities, with an under other than honorable conditions character of service.

6.  His DD Form 214 shows he was discharged on 19 February 1980 in the rank/grade of private/E-1 after completing 2 years and 7 days creditable active service.  
7.  The applicant applied to the Army Discharge Review Board (ADRB) for an upgrade of his discharge.  After careful consideration of his military records and other available evidence the ADRB determined he was properly discharged and denied his request for an upgrade of his discharge.  

8.  Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel.  

	a.  Chapter 14 establishes policy and prescribes procedures for separating members for misconduct.  Specific categories include minor disciplinary infractions, a pattern of misconduct, 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.

	b.  Paragraph 3-7a states 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.

	c.  Paragraph 3-7b provides that a general discharge is a separation from the Army under honorable conditions.  When authorized, it is issued to a Soldier whose military record is satisfactory but not sufficiently meritorious to warrant an honorable discharge.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant's request for the upgrade of his under other than honorable conditions discharge has been carefully considered.  

2.  His record is void of the facts and circumstances surrounding his discharge.  However, it does contain evidence of NJP on several occasions and evidence of counseling for misconduct on several occasions.  It also contains a properly-constituted DD Form 214 that confirms the authority for his discharge.  

3.  Absent evidence of error or injustice, government regularity is presumed.  It is also presumed that his separation processing was accomplished in accordance with the applicable regulation, that all requirements of law and regulation were met, and that his rights were fully protected throughout the separation process.

4.  He contends that he was young at the time.  However, the available evidence shows he completed initial entry training.  This shows he was mature enough to satisfactorily serve and there is no evidence indicating he was any less mature than other Soldiers of the same age who successfully completed their terms of military service.  

5.  Based on his record of NJP and the record of counseling for several acts of misconduct, his service clearly did not meet the standards of acceptable conduct and performance of duty for Army personnel.  His misconduct also rendered his service unsatisfactory; therefore, he is not entitled to either a general or an honorable discharge.

6.  Based on the foregoing, there is no basis to grant the 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)                                         AR20130017719



3


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20130017719



2


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1