IN THE CASE OF:	  

		BOARD DATE:	  16 October 2014

		DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20140000469 


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 (UOTHC) discharge
* correction of his social security number (SSN) to show xxx-xx-2050 instead of xxx-xx-0205

2.  He states his SSN in block 3 (SSN) on his DD Form 214 (Report of Separation from Active Duty) is incorrect and it should read xxx-xx-2050.  He had a difficult time adjusting to the requirements of the U.S. Army which led to a pattern of misconduct.  He believes his type of discharge was extreme and not fitting for the minor infractions for which he was charged.  

3.  He provides his DD Form 214 and social security card.

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's service record shows he was born on 15 May 1958 and he enlisted in the Regular Army (RA) on 27 January 1977 at age 19.  His DD Form 4 (Enlistment or Reenlistment Agreement - Armed Forces of the United States) shows his SSN as xxx-xx-0205.

3.  His disciplinary history includes acceptance of nonjudicial punishment (NJP) under Article 15, Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ), on four occasions for the following offenses:

* sounding the fire alarm located on third floor at a building at Fort Lee, VA on 18 June 1977
* failing to go at the time prescribed to his appointed place of duty on 27 June 1978
* being found drunk while on duty as a cook on 28 November 1978
* failing to go at the time prescribed to his appointed place of duty on 25 December 1978
* failing to go at the time prescribed to his appointed place of duty on 26 December 1978

4.  He was barred from reenlistment on 12 February 1979 for his receipt of NJP under Article 15, UCMJ on 28 June, 1 December, and 26 December 1978.  His DA Form 4126-R (Bar to Reenlistment Certificate) includes comments from his commanding officer who stated:

* the applicant's standards of conduct and job performance were, since he was assigned to the unit, far below the minimum standards of the Army
* the applicant's attitude toward work and military life was totally unsatisfactory
* the applicant was continually late for work and required the closest of supervision to accomplish the simplest of tasks
* the applicant was counseled on many occasions about his attitude and behavior
* every possible effort had been made by the chain of command to assist the applicant in adjusting to military life
* the applicant ignored counseling, didn't take it seriously, and his attitude and job performance had not improved, but instead had declined

5.  His notification of pending separation action under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations – Enlisted Personnel), paragraph 14-33b(1) for misconduct – frequent incidents of a discreditable nature with civil or military authorities.  His service record shows he consulted with legal counsel, waived consideration of his case by a board of officers, waived a personal appearance, and did not submit statements in his own behalf.

6.  On 1 March 1979, the company commander recommended the applicant be discharged prior to the expiration of his term of service.  The company commander indicated the applicant had been counseled on numerous occasions between August 1977 and November 1978 for being late, not being recommended for promotion, leaving the dining facility without authority, being insubordinate, missing physical training formations, missing physical training, misconduct in the dining facility, failing to be on work call, larceny, forgery, lying, failing to report for duty, and being intoxicated on duty.  

7.  The separation authority waived rehabilitation and directed that the applicant be discharged under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 14 for misconduct with the issuance of a UOTHC Discharge Certificate.  

8.  On 10 April 1979, he was discharged after completion of 2 years, 2 months, and 14 days of active military service.  

9.  His service record does not indicate he applied to the Army Discharge Review Board within that board's 15-year statute of limitations.

10.  Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel.  Chapter 14 establishes policy and prescribes 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 UOTHC is normally appropriate for a Soldier discharged for acts or patterns of misconduct.  

11.  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.

12.  Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 3-7b, states 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.  
13.  Army Regulation 635-5 (Separation Documents) at the time governed the preparation of the DD Form 214.  It states that the DD Form 214 is a synopsis of the Soldier's most recent period of continuous active duty.  It provides a brief, clear-cut record of active Army service at the time of release from active duty, retirement, or discharge.

14.  He provided a copy of his social security card that shows a different SSN than that shown on the documents in his service record.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant contends he had a difficult time adjusting to the requirements of the U.S. Army which led to a pattern of misconduct.  However, there is no evidence that indicates the applicant was any less mature than other Soldiers of the same age who successfully completed their military service obligation.  

2.  The applicant's contention that he believes his type of discharge was extreme and not fitting for the minor infractions for which he was charged was carefully considered.  However, his service record shows he received four Article 15s for various offenses, such as sounding the fire alarm in a military building, failing to go at the time prescribed to his appointed place of duty (three separate occasions), and for being found drunk while on duty.  His service record also shows he received a bar from reenlistment and numerous adverse counselings.  

3.  The discharge proceedings were conducted in accordance with law and regulations applicable at the time.  The character of the discharge is commensurate with the applicant's overall record of military service.

4.  It appears the applicant's chain of command determined his overall military service did not meet the standards of either a general or honorable discharge and appropriately issued him a UOTHC discharge.  

5.  Although the applicant requests correction of his records to show the SSN as shown on his social security card, all the documents in his military service records show he served on active duty using a different SSN.

6.  For historical purposes, the Army has an interest in maintaining the accuracy of its records.  The data and information contained in those records should reflect the conditions and circumstances that existed at the time the records were created.  In the absence of a showing of material error or injustice, there is a reluctance to recommend that those records be changed.  While it is understandable the applicant desires to now record his correct SSN in his military records, there is not a sufficiently compelling reason for compromising the integrity of the Army’s records at this late date.

7.  The applicant is advised that a copy of this decisional document, which confirms his correct SSN, will be filed in his Official Military Personnel File (OMPF).  This should serve to clarify any questions or confusion in regard to the difference in the SSN recorded in his military records and to satisfy his desire to have his current SSN documented in his OMPF.

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)                                         AR20140000469





3


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20140000469



2


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1