BOARD DATE:	  23 September 2014

		DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20140000598 


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 discharge, from a general, under honorable conditions discharge to an honorable discharge. 

2.  The applicant states he served his country and believes he did a good job until he started using drugs while stationed in Hawaii.  He truly loved the military; however, he made poor choices.  He wants to be able to be proud of his service before he passes away as his health is not good and this is his one chance to do so. 

3.  The applicant did not provide any additional documentation. 

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 18 June 1984 and completed training for military occupational specialties 94B (Food Service Specialist) and 94F (Hospital Food Service Specialist).  After completing his training, he was assigned to Tripler Army Medical Center in Hawaii. 

3.  His DA Form 2-1 (Personnel Qualification Record – Part II) does not show any significant awards, acts of valor or special achievements.  Private First Class/E-3 was the highest rank/grade he attained while serving on active duty. 

4.  On 28 October 1985, the Chief, Clinical Dietetics Branch submitted a letter to his company commander in which she wrote that he wanted to be discharged from the Army.  He had begun having serious marital problems that he claimed caused him to act irrationally and not report for duty as scheduled.  He was offered counseling and assistance from his supervisory chain but he did not seek the assistance offered and went absent without leave (AWOL) instead.  She recommended he be discharged; however, she further requested he be allowed to continue to work in the branch as long as possible to offset the loss in personnel his discharge would cause the branch.  

5.  On 5 November 1985, he was given a mental status evaluation.  He was diagnosed with marital problems and an adjustment disorder with depressed mood, resolved.  He was cleared for any administrative action deemed appropriate by his command. 

6.  On 8 November 1985, his immediate commander initiated a recommendation for separation under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations - Enlisted Personnel), chapter 13, paragraph 13-2 for unsatisfactory performance.  His commander stated the reason for the proposed action was due to the applicant's failure to conform to military life, tardiness to work, and failure to perform military duties in a satisfactory manner.  

7.  On 18 November 1985, he was advised by counsel on the basis for the contemplated action to separate him for unsatisfactory performance under the provisions of chapter 13 of Army Regulation 635-200.  He indicated that he understood he may expect to encounter substantial prejudice in civilian life if he was issued a general discharge under honorable conditions.  He elected not to submit any statements on his own behalf. 

8.  On 25 November 1985, the separation authority approved his discharge under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 13 for unsatisfactory performance.  The separation authority directed he be issued a General Discharge Certificate and that he not be transferred to the U.S. Army Reserve, Individual Ready Reserve. 
9.  Accordingly, on 4 December 1985, he was separated under the provisions of chapter 13 of Army Regulation 635-200 for unsatisfactory performance.  He completed a total of 1 year, 5 months, and 17 days of net active service.  His character of service was listed as under honorable conditions.  He had 4 days of time lost due to AWOL. 

10.  He applied to the Army Discharge Review Board (ADRB) within that board's 15-year statute of limitations; however, on 25 September 1987, the ADRB determined he was properly and equitability discharged and denied his request for an upgrade of his discharge.

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

12.  Army Regulation 635-200 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 (emphasis added), or is otherwise so meritorious that any other characterization would be clearly inappropriate.  

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant contends that he was a good Soldier until he began using drugs during his tour of duty in Hawaii.  While this may be true, the evidence shows he was offered counseling and various other types of support by his supervisors during his period of difficulties but he declined the help.

2.  Evidence shows his separation was based upon unsatisfactory performance as a Soldier.  His quality of service did not meet the standards of acceptable conduct and performance of duty for Army personnel.  Therefore, his chain of command determined a general discharge was appropriate and he submitted no statements at the time to refute the decision.  

3.  His records show he was properly and equitably discharged in accordance with the regulations in effect at the time.  Lacking evidence to the contrary, it is determined that all requirements of law and regulations were met and his rights were fully protected throughout the separation process.

4.  Based on the foregoing, there is insufficient basis to upgrade his 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)                                         AR20140000598





3


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20140000598



2


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1