IN THE CASE OF: 

		BOARD DATE:	    19 August 2014

		DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20130022138 


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 is providing documentation that shows his character has changed over the years following his discharge.  His discharge was unjust.

3.  The applicant provides copies of the following:

* DD Form 214 (Report of Separation from Active Duty)
* Nomination for the Good Shepherd Award
* two character reference letters

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 Regular Army on 17 May 1977 for 3 years.  He served as a power generator and wheeled vehicle mechanic.  He was promoted to pay grade E-4 on 1 November 1978.

3.  He received the following counseling statements on/for:

* 9 January 1979 – being late for morning formation and further disciplinary action
* 30 January 1979 – being out of uniform (haircut) and not complying with verbal suggestion to get a military haircut
* 7 February 1979 – failing to follow instruction to shine his boots
* 8 February 1979 – being late for morning formations on 29 and 31 January 1979

4.  He accepted nonjudicial punishment under Article 15, Uniform Code of Military Justice, on/for:

* 15 February 1979 – disobeying a lawful order issued by his platoon sergeant and failing to go to his appointed place of duty on 30 January and 6 and 8 February 1979
* 17 February 1979 – committing an assault on another Soldier by waiving a dangerous weapon (knife) at him and threatening to kill him

5.  A Report of Mental Hygiene Evaluation, dated 28 February 1979, shows he was found to have suicidal violent tendencies.  He was also found to be fully alert, fully oriented, with a depressed mood, and a normal thinking process.  He was diagnosed with suicidal ideation manifested by situational depression.  The examining mental hygiene officer stated:

   a.  The applicant had been seen by the Community Mental Health Activity (CHMA) and other mental health clinics several times in regard to his emotional stability, attitude, and coping mechanism.  All rehabilitative efforts by the command and CMHA to enable the applicant to become a productive Soldier had been fruitless.  The applicant was adamant about his desire to be out of the service.

   b.  The applicant's intense dislike for his military occupational specialty (MOS) and desire to be out of the Army had now started to affect his normal body function, job performance, attitude, and emotional stability.  The applicant has reached a point where he was disregarding his personal hygiene and job responsibility. 

   c.  He recommended the command give strong consideration to an administrative separation of the applicant because continuation in the service could be detrimental to the applicant and the Army.

6.  A DA Form 2173 (Statement of Medical Examination and Duty Status), dated 9 March 1979, shows he was admitted to the hospital on 2 March 1979 for a self-inflicted laceration of his right wrist as a result of allegedly being depressed.

7.  On 8 March 1979, the applicant’s unit commander initiated action to separate the applicant under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations – Enlisted Separations), paragraph 5-31 (Expeditious Discharge Program (EPD)), with a general discharge.  The unit commander stated during the past several months the applicant had exhibited an increasingly poor attitude, lack of motivation, lack of self-discipline, and inability to adapt.  The applicant had gotten to the point where he did not seem to care about himself, the U.S. Army, or what the result of his actions would be.  The rehabilitation attempts of that unit and other facilities on the post had not been successful.  That left no choice but to expeditiously as possible discharge the applicant.  The applicant was advised of his rights.

8.  On 12 March 1979, the applicant acknowledged receipt of the proposed discharge and consented.  He also acknowledged he could receive a general discharge and the results of the receipt of such a discharge.  He waived his rights and elected to submit a statement in his own behalf.    

9.  In his statement, dated 12 March 1979, the applicant stated:

   a.  He enlisted in MOS 91F (psychiatric specialist) and completed the combat medic courses.  He was unable to cope with the idea of becoming a 91F and the Army life altogether.  He stated he would go ahead to be a 91B (medical specialist), but was told that MOS was over-strength.   

   b.  He then received orders for a generator course.  He told them it was a mistake, but no one listened and he was sent to Fort Leonard Wood, MO.  After a hernia operation he was made the battalion commander's driver.  It was a waste of time as far as preparing for his future.  He was isolated from most of the Army people.  No one listened to him anyway, so he tried to make the best of it and maintain.

   c.  After some 8 months it was decided it was time for him to return to his MOS.  Not knowing the left end of a wrench from the right and with no MOS training or previous training before the army, he was assigned to the 244th Maintenance shop as a mechanic.  He was unable to cope with the job, the people, and the Army life again.  He found himself in a place where he just couldn't cope.  He advised Mental Hygiene and they proceeded with discharge papers for the second time.  Under normal circumstances he was an alright, hard-working, and conscientious person.  He felt an explanation was in order because his discharge contained phrases such as "increasingly poor attitude," lack of judgment and motivation," and lack of self-discipline."

10.  On 14 March 1979, the separation authority approved the applicant’s discharge and directed the issuance of a general discharge.

11.  Accordingly, he was discharged in pay grade E-3 on 23 March 1979.  He was credited with completing 1 year, 10 months, and 2 days of net active service.

12.  He provided copies of the following:

	a.  His Nomination for the Good Shepherd Award for his outstanding service to Baptist youth and scouting at the Stevens Street Baptist and New Hope Baptist churches.

   b.  Two character references letters, dated 25 July and 2 December 2013, wherein the individuals attested to the applicant being a deeply religious man who was very active in his church and as a Cub Scout leader.  The individuals stated the applicant had demonstrated his sincere love and care for children over the years and received awards and recognition for his leadership.

13.  There is no evidence he applied to the Army Discharge Review Board within its 15-year statute of limitations for an upgrade of his discharge.

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

   a.  Paragraph 5-31 – The EDP provided for the discharge of individuals 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.  Such personnel were issued a general or honorable discharge, as appropriate.

   b.  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.
DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant's records show he was a substandard Soldier who demonstrated a poor attitude, lack of motivation, lack of self-discipline, and an inability to adapt to the Army.  Because he could not or would not meet acceptable standards of conduct, his commander recommended his discharge under the EDP.

2.  He provided no evidence or a convincing argument to show his discharge should be upgraded and his military records contain no evidence which would entitle him to an upgrade of his discharge.  Given his substandard conduct, his separation processing is presumed to have been conducted in accordance with law and regulations applicable at the time.  Both the character of the discharge and the reason for discharge are commensurate with his overall record of military service.

3.  In view of the foregoing, he is not entitled to an upgrade of his general discharge to a fully honorable discharge.

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)                                         AR20130022319



3


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20130022138



2


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1