IN THE CASE OF:	   

	BOARD DATE:	26 May 2015

	DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20140016802 

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 that his general discharge be upgraded to an honorable discharge.

2.  The applicant states his company commander had barred him from reenlistment and told him that he would get a GD.  At the age of 20, he did not comprehend the meaning of this type of discharge.  He served with the 101st Airborne Division and his uncle, who was prior military, helped him enlist in the Army. Additionally, he would like the upgrade for his family when he passes away.

3.  The applicant provides no additional evidence or documentation in support of his request.

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 allows the Army Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR) to excuse failure to file within the 3-year statute of limitations if the ABCMR determines that it would be in the interest of justice to do so.  In this case, the ABCMR will conduct a review of the merits of the case to determine if it would be in the interest of justice to excuse the applicant’s failure to timely file.

2.  On 6 March 1962, the applicant enlisted in the Regular Army.  He successfully completed initial entry training and was awarded military occupational specialty 111.07 (Light Weapons Infantryman).

3.  On 17 May 1963, the applicant received nonjudicial punishment (NJP) under Article 15, Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ), for failing to sign out in compliance with current alert sign out procedures.

4.  On 16 January 1964, the applicant received NJP under Article 15, UCMJ (reason unknown).

5.  On 16 March 1964, the applicant received NJP under Article 15, UCMJ for being absent without leave (AWOL) from 24 February 1964 to 5 March 1964.

6.  On 14 August 1964, the applicant received NJP under Article 15, UCMJ for being AWOL from his place of duty.

7.  On 26 August 1964, the applicant received NJP under Article 15, UCMJ due to failing to sign in from leave at the time prescribed.

8.  On 30 October 1964, the applicant received NJP under Article 15, UCMJ due to failing to sign in from leave at the time prescribed.

9.  On 8 February 1965, the applicant's commander informed him that he intended to bar the applicant from reenlistment.  The commander stated that the applicant had a record of habitual misconduct as evidence by seven Article 15 actions again him.  Additionally, he stated that the applicant had been counseled on numerous occasions and he had advised him of the adverse consequences that might ensue from his actions.

10.  On 8 February 1965, the applicant acknowledged that he had been advised of the basis for the action, and he stated that he did desire to submit a statement.  
11.  On 9 February 1965, the applicant received NJP under Article 15, UCMJ, due to failing to sign in from leave at the time prescribed. 

12.  On 25 February 1965, the appropriate authority approved the bar to reenlistment.

13.  On 19 March 1965, the applicant was released from active duty due to the expiration of his term of service.  He had completed 2 years, 11 months and 29 days of total active service that was characterized as under honorable conditions and he was issued a General Discharge Certificate.
14.  There is no indication that the applicant applied to the Army Discharge Review Board (ADRB) for an upgrade of his discharge within the ADRB's 15-year statute of limitations.

15.  Army Regulation 601-280 (Total Army Retention Program) prescribes procedures to deny reenlistment (through a field commander’s bar to reenlistment) to Soldiers whose immediate separation under administrative procedures is not warranted but whose reentry into, or service beyond ETS with, the Active Army is not in the best interest of the military service.  When discharge under administrative procedures is not warranted, action will be taken to bar untrainable Soldiers from further service with the Regular Army.

16.  Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations Enlisted Personnel), in effect at the time, 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.  Whenever there is doubt, it is to be resolved in favor of the individual.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant contends that his discharge with a characterization of under honorable conditions should be upgraded to an honorable discharge.

2.  Evidence shows that the applicant was properly and equitably discharged in accordance with regulations in effect at the time.  The type of discharge directed and the reasons for separation were appropriate considering all the facts of the case.  The records contain no indication of procedural or other errors that would tend to jeopardize his rights.

3.  The applicant's record shows he received NJP on seven occasions.  As a result, his quality of service did not meet the standards of acceptable conduct and performance of duty for Army personnel.  Therefore, the applicant is not entitled to an honorable discharge.

4.  In order to justify correction of a military record the applicant must, or it must otherwise satisfactorily appear, that the record is in error or unjust.  The applicant has failed to submit evidence that would satisfy that requirement.



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)                                         AR20140016802


2


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS