BOARD DATE:   3 February 2015

		DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20140011237 


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 honorable.

2.  The applicant states he has told the discharge would be upgraded to honorable after six months and that has not happened.  As a young man he engaged in poor thinking that was agitated by the use of alcohol and illicit drugs.  He is in need of Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) mental health services.  He has committed himself to sobriety and is reeducating himself by way of the Veterans Readjustment Program (VRAP).

3.  The applicant provides a copy of his DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty).

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 17 September 1983.  He held military occupational specialty 13B (Cannon Crewman).

3.  His record shows he received two negative counseling statements and a letter of indebtedness between 22 March and 19 April 1984.

4.  The applicant was informed that his company commander was initiating elimination processing because of his unsatisfactory performance due to his negative counseling statements, letters of indebtedness, dishonored checks and financial problems.

5.  The applicant consulted with counsel, waived his rights, and acknowledged that he could expect to encounter substantial prejudice in civilian life if he were issued a general discharge.  He submitted a statement in his own behalf in which he indicated he wanted to get out of the Army and provided several religious reasons for his decision.

6.  The company commander recommended the applicant's separation due to unsatisfactory performance.

7.  The appropriate authority approved the separation and directed issuance of a general discharge.  On 24 May 1984, the applicant was discharged under honorable conditions for unsatisfactory performance under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 13.  He had completed 8 months and 8 days of creditable active duty service.

8.  There is no indication the applicant applied to the Army Discharge Review Board for an upgrade of his discharge during its 15-year statute of limitations.

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

	a.  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.

	b.  Chapter 13 provides for separation due to unsatisfactory performance when in the commander’s judgment the individual will not become a satisfactory Soldier; retention will have an adverse impact on military discipline, good order and morale; the service member will be a disruptive influence in the future; the basis for separation will continue or recur; and/or the ability of the service member to perform effectively in the future, including potential for advancement or leadership, is unlikely.  Service of Soldiers separated because of unsatisfactory performance under this regulation will be characterized as honorable or under honorable conditions.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant's administrative separation was accomplished in compliance with all requirements of law and applicable regulations with no indication of procedural errors which would have jeopardized his rights.  The type of discharge directed and the narrative reason were therefore appropriate and equitable.

2.  The evidence of record shows the applicant demonstrated that he could not or would not meet acceptable standards.  He received negative counseling statements, letters of indebtedness, notices of dishonored checks and had financial problems.  Accordingly, his immediate commander initiated separation action.

3.  The U.S. Army does not have, nor has it ever had, a policy to automatically upgrade discharges.  Each case is decided on its own merits when an applicant requests a change in discharge.  Changes may be warranted if the Board determines that the characterization of service or the reason for discharge or both were improper or inequitable.  

4.  The ABCMR does not upgrade discharges based solely on the passage of time nor does it correct records solely for the purpose of establishing eligibility for benefits from another agency.  Granting of veterans' benefits is not within the purview of the ABCMR.

5.  He has not shown error, injustice, or inequity for the relief he requests.  Therefore, the applicant is not entitled to an 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 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)                                         AR20110002275



3


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20140011237



2


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1