BOARD DATE:	  14 August 2014

		DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20130021945 


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, in effect, correction of his DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) to show in:

* Item 24 (Character of Service) - honorable or general
* Item 18 (Remarks) - truck driver license

2.  The applicant states, in effect:

   a.  He was administered truck driver training that permitted him to deliver meals ready-to-eat (MREs) to his platoon and for guard duty at Fort Jackson, SC. His pattern of behavior, including leadership, demonstrated his character of service outweighed the alleged single incident.

   b.  Nearly 1 year ago he had to have immediate surgery for cancer.  He didn't want to at the time because his mother was in another hospital; she is a cancer and heart-attack survivor.  During his stay in the hospital a friend raised the issue of his military service.  He told the friend that he only served a short period; he did not serve the entire 4 years he was committed to serve.  A Member of Congress, her local staff, and the Joint Chiefs of Staff in Washington were working to help him get a general discharge.  He was told the Congresswoman sent a letter to that effect to his superiors just before his discharge.



   c.  He believed and trusted his superiors that he would be discharged with at least an under honorable conditions (general) discharge.  It was the first time he had heard of this type of discharge.  He had heard only of the other two – honorable and dishonorable, nothing more.

   d.  During his period of service, his superiors repeatedly volunteered him for leadership positions.  He remained a leader until he was separated.  He was shocked to learn for the first time that his service is characterized as less than honorable.  He has earned a masters degree and he is working on his doctor of philosophy.

   e.  He joined the Army on his own volition on 24 July 1986.  He signed into the Army's Delayed Entry Program (DEP) as a matter of convenience.  He wanted to ensure that his wife of that period was properly cared for while he was in boot camp and advanced individual training (AIT).  He completed boot camp and was allowed go home for a few days for Christmas.  It was during his visit with his then wife that he became aware of extramarital affairs regarding his wife. This played a major impact on his actions and his discharge from the Army.

   f.  When he returned to the Army, he arrived with a saddened heart.  When he arrived at Fort Gordon, GA, he began the pursuit of enrolling into officer's training and soon found himself taking the test.  He was told he scored the second highest on the test.  He was later told that General Patton held the highest score. He never had the wildest dream that he would have the opportunity to enhance his military career so soon.  The belief was that he would faithfully serve one or two years then be afforded the opportunity to enter Officer Candidate School (OCS). 

   g.  At no time during his service did he engage in any activity of moral turpitude and certainly none was found to be maladaptive as erroneously stated in his military record.  

   h.  He recently discovered an error or injustice in his military record.  One particular record found was that belonging to his father and his father's notes from his activity within the Army, specifically during that period of discharge.  A copy of his father's notes shed light indicating that he was compliant with all of his orders even up to and through his last few moments in the Army.  He trusted his superiors to the end, but in the end his record was damaged.
   
   i.  He was informed that he was on the path to receive an honorable or a general discharge.  He was told that a letter from a Congresswoman was sent to the commander indicating that she was working on his discharge with a focus on keeping him in until he received an honorable or general discharge to include his service of not less than 181 days.  He was led to believe that if he received an honorable discharge he would be eligible to participate in the Army's college fund.  He was promised upon his initial DEP entry he would be credited with his full time in the Army which began 9 months earlier than the date of discharge.  

   j.  The type of discharge he received was an injustice to his character and integrity and his service to America.  Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations – Enlisted Separations), paragraph 5-13, which states he was separated for "personality disorder that interferes with assignment or performance of duty" and "is a deeply ingrained maladaptive pattern of behavior of long duration" was unfounded.  He was not found with any pattern of "long duration" of a personality disorder; if he was, then why would an Army Ranger tell him to attempt to enter officer training as an Army leader. 

   k.  His licensure for truck driving during his service at Fort Jackson was not indicated in his military service record.  He earned that license while volunteering for kitchen patrol duty during basic training.  He was ordered to drive the MRE's to his own platoon.  He was ordered to drive a truck throughout Fort Jackson while on guard duty.

   l.  He was never counseled on the matter of his dishonorable discharge (entry level status discharge/uncharacterized service).  This was evidenced throughout the course of action by him, his superiors, records of third-party members (chaplain's letter, father's record of telephone conversations with their Congressional Representative, father's own physician's letter, and letters of recommendation, etc.).  He remained loyal in the service and to his country.  

3.  The applicant provides a copy of his Certificate of Enlistment.

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 provide in the statute of limitations, the ABCMR has elected to conduct a substantive review of the cases 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 sufficient bases to waive the statute of limitations.

2.  The applicant enlisted in the U.S. Army Reserve under the DEP on 24 July 1986.  He provided a copy of the resulting certificate.  He was discharged from the DEP on 27 October 1986 and subsequently enlisted in the Regular Army, in pay grade E-3, on 28 October 1986, for 3 years.  

3.  Item 35 (Section VII – Current and Previous Assignments) of his DA Form 2-1 (Personnel Qualification Record – Part II) shows he was attending AIT for military occupational specialty (MOS) 31C (Radio Operator) at Fort Gordon, GA, effective 6 January 1987.  Item 35 does not indicate he completed AIT for award of the MOS.

4.  His records show he received counseling on/for:

* 31 January 1987 - ratings of "fair" in his appearance, initiative, conduct, military courtesy, motivation, academic evaluation, task certified, self-discipline, physical fitness, green inspection, and wall locker inspection
* 2 March 1987 - sending money home to his wife

5.  In a memorandum, dated 6 March 1987, the Assistant Brigade Chaplain stated the applicant had been counseled by that office on several occasions.  The applicant had multiple family circumstances making separation from the military necessary.  He was in the process of a divorce from his wife which created a hardship on his father because of the family farm.  His wife was managing the farm until someone could be obtained to take over.  That was necessitated due to his father's health conditions.  It was imperative that the applicant be separated in accordance with Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 6, separation for the convenience of the Government, because of extreme hardship.

6.  He also received the following counseling on/for:

   a.  7 March 1987 - justification of the reasons why he wanted to be separated from the service with a hardship discharge due to the location of family members nearby who could see that his father was taken care of.

   b.  12 March 1987 - request of counseling through Community Health Mental Services (CHMS) and recommendation for his separation.

   c.  20 March 1987 - recommendation for separation due to his negative attitude and inability to act rationally when faced with personal problems.  The applicant stated his negative attitude was due to undue hardship.  He previously requested a hardship discharge; hence, his family concern outweighed his desire to serve in the Army.

7.  His military record contains letters from his father, his father's doctor, and his father's friend in support of his request for a hardship discharge due to his father's failing health.

8.  A Certificate of Psychiatric Evaluation, dated 24 March 1987, shows he was evaluated during his period of hospitalization from 16 to 25 March 1987.  The Chief, Inpatient Psychiatry stated:

   a.  The applicant was hospitalized for evaluation after expressing suicidal ideation and stating that he could not cope with being separated from his ailing father.  A review of present difficulties in the context of earlier behavior patterns revealed that he had long-standing maladaptive personality traits that persisted without modification or change.  He was diagnosed with a mixed personality disorder. 

   b.  The applicant met the retention standards prescribed in chapter 3 of Army Regulation 40-501 (Standards of Medical Fitness) and there was no psychiatric disease or defect which warranted disposition through medical channels.  The applicant was mentally competent and able to appreciate any wrongfulness in his conduct and to conform his conduct to the requirements of the law.  He had the mental capacity to understand and participate in board or administrative proceedings.

   c.  The applicant's return to duty would probably lead to a repletion of such responses as were noted prior to hospitalization.  Further attempts at rehabilitation within the military framework would be fruitless and counterproductive.  The recommendation was that the applicant be administratively separated as expeditiously as possible.

9.  On 30 March 1987, the applicant's company commander initiated action against the applicant to separate him under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 5-13, for personality disorder.  The company commander stated the applicant was hospitalized from 16 to 25 March 1987 after expressing a desire to commit suicide as a result of marital problems and the declining health of his father who had cancer.  As a result of his inability to deal with adverse situations, his overall duty performance had declined drastically.  All efforts to assist the applicant through counseling, further hospitalization, transfer, or other administrative action would be of little value.  The applicant had been evaluated by CMHS and recommended for administrative discharge as expeditiously as possible.  He advised the applicant that he could receive and he was recommending the applicant receive an entry level separation (uncharacterized service).  

10.  On 30 March 1987, the applicant acknowledged receipt of the separation notification action in accordance with Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 5-13 by reason of personality disorder.  He waived his right to consulting counsel and he elected not to submit a statement in his own behalf.  He acknowledged that he may encounter substantial prejudice in civilian life if his discharge was approved. He also acknowledged he understood if the recommendation for separation was approved, he would receive an entry level separation with uncharacterized service. 

11.  On 30 March 1987, the applicant's battalion commended recommended approval of the applicant separation with a character of service of entry-level (uncharacterized).

12.  On 15 April 1987, consistent with the chain of command recommendations and subsequent to a legal review, the separation authority approved his discharge action and ordered the applicant discharged.  

13.  Accordingly, the applicant was discharged in pay grade E-3 on 17 April 1987.  He was credited with completing 5 months and 20 days of net active service.  His service was characterized as entry-level status.

14.  His record is void of any evidence he was awarded a truck driver license during his period of active duty.

15.  Army Regulation 635-200, in effect at the time, set forth the basic authority for separation of enlisted personnel.  The regulation stated in:

   a.  Paragraph 4-2(1), the service of Soldiers who were in an entry–level status would be awarded a character of service of honorable, unless the Soldier was in an entry level status and then the service was uncharacterized.  Entry level status was the first 180 days (6 months) of continuous active duty.

   b.  Para 5-13 - a Soldier with less than 24 months of active duty service, as of the date separation proceedings are initiated, would be separated for personality disorder (not amounting to disability under Army Regulation 635-40 (Personnel Separations - Physical Evaluation for Retention, Retirement, or Separation)) that interfered with assignment or with performance of duty.

   c.  Paragraph 3-7a – an honorable discharge was a separation with honor.  The honorable characterization was appropriate when the quality of the member’s service generally had met the standards of acceptance conduct and performance of duty for Army personnel or was otherwise so meritorious that any other characterization would be inappropriate.
   d.  Paragraph 3-7b - a general discharge was a separation from the Army under honorable condition.  When authorized, it was issued to a Soldier whose military record was satisfactory but not sufficiently meritorious to warrant an honorable discharge.

16.  Army Regulation 635-5 (Separation Documents), in effect at the time, governed the preparation of the DD Form 214.  It stated the DD Form 214 would be prepared for all personnel at the time of their retirement, discharge, or release from active duty.  There were no provisions for listing any type of licensure awarded to the service member during their period of active duty in item 18.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The evidence of record shows the applicant underwent a mental status evaluation.  A review of his difficulties in the context of earlier behavior patterns revealed that he had long-standing maladaptive personality traits that persisted without modification or change.  He was diagnosed with a mixed personality disorder.  This condition impaired his capacity to adapt and function in a military environment.  His condition was not amenable to hospitalization, treatment, transfer, disciplinary action, training, or reclassification into another type of duty within the military.  The diagnosis was made by competent military medical authority.  Accordingly, his chain of command initiated separation action against him.

2.  His separation action was accomplished in compliance with applicable regulations and there is no evidence of procedural errors that would have jeopardized his rights.  The discharge proceedings were conducted in accordance with law and regulations applicable at the time.  He completed 5 months and 20 days of creditable active service and he received an entry level status discharge with uncharacterized service.  On 30 March 1987, he acknowledged he would receive this type of discharge.

3.  During the first 180 days of continuous active military service, a member's service is under review.  When separated within the first 180 days, service is usually not characterized unless the circumstances of the separation warrant an under other than honorable conditions discharge.  He would have received the same characterization of service even if he had received a hardship discharge.  An honorable characterization may be given only if the service clearly warrants that characterization by unusual circumstances of personal conduct and performance of military duty and it is approved by the Secretary of the Army.

4.  The applicant did not receive a dishonorable discharge.  Such characterization of service can only be authorized by a general court-martial.  He received an entry level status discharge (uncharacterized service).  Uncharacterized service is neither positive nor negative; it is not "derogatory."  An uncharacterized service 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 his/her character of service to be rated as honorable or otherwise.  Therefore, the applicant received the correct characterization of service and there is no reason to change it. 

5.  With respect to showing his truck driver license on his DD Form 214, not only was there no provision in the governing regulation to list such license on the
DD Form 214, there is no evidence in his service records and he provided none to show he obtained a truck driver license.  Therefore, he is not entitled to correction of item 18 of his DD Form 214 to show he earned a truck driver license during his period of active service.

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)                                         AR20130021945



3


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20130021945



4


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1