IN THE CASE OF:  

		BOARD DATE:  21 July 2015

		DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20140021330 


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 was reduced from E-4 to E-2 for "inefficiency" while drawing "pro pay" in his military occupational specialty (MOS).

3.  The applicant did not provide any 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 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 16 June 1959 for a period of
3 years.  He held military occupational specialty 273.10 (Fixed Station Transmitter Repair).
3.  His DA Form 24 (Service Record) shows in:

	a.  Section 1 (Appointment, Promotions, or Reductions) he was promoted to specialist four (SP4)/E-4 on 18 October 1961 and he was reduced to private two (PV2)/E-2 on 2 April 1962.

	b.  Section 4 (Chronological Record of Military Service) he was assigned to Quarry Heights in the Canal Zone from 27 March 1960 to 4 April 1962.

4.  A Headquarters, U.S. Army Caribbean, Fort Amador, Canal Zone, letter, Subject:  Revocation of Security Clearance, date 6 March 1962, notified the applicant that the revocation of his security clearance seriously restricted the extent to which he could be properly assigned duties in his school-trained MOS. 

	a.  Additionally, the applicant's alleged involvement in the wrongful use of marijuana during the period 2 February to 25 February 1962 significantly lowered his efficiency in performing his duties.  The wrongful use of marijuana allegation was contained in a Report of Investigation, 50th Military Police Detachment, Headquarters, Fort Amador, CZ, dated 22 March 1962.

	c.  The Commander proposed to reduce the applicant for inefficiency under the provisions of paragraph 30d, Army Regulation 624-200.

	d.  The applicant was instructed to acknowledge receipt of the letter and to submit any matters deemed pertinent in rebuttal.

5.  The applicant acknowledged receipt of the letter and indicated he did not have any matters in rebuttal.

6.  On 2 April 1962, the applicant was notified he was reduced from SP4 to PV2. 

7.  The applicant acknowledged receipt and indicated he did not desire to appeal. 

8.  The applicant's discharge packet is not available for review.  His DD Form 214 shows, on 9 April 1962, he was transferred to the U. S. Army Reserve (USAR) under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-205 (Discharge and Release for the Convenience of the Government), paragraph 7 as an early separation of Overseas Returnee.  The character of service is listed as "Under Honorable Conditions."  He had completed 2 years and 9 months, and 24 days of total active service. 

9.  There is no available evidence showing he applied to the Army Discharge Review Board (ADRB) for an upgrade of his discharge within that board's 15-year statute of limitations

10.  Army Regulation 635-205, in effect at the time, set forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel for convenience of the government.  Paragraph 7 governed the separation of enlisted personnel with less than 3 months remaining to serve.  Paragraph 7(a) pertained to overseas returnees.  It stated commanders were authorized to order separation for the convenience of the government of enlisted personnel for return to the States.  Enlisted members of the Regular Army and U.S. Army Reserve (USAR) who upon arrival had less than 3 months remaining before expiration of term of service would be discharged for the convenience of the government, released from active duty, and returned to their former National Guard or USAR status, or released from active duty and transferred to the USAR.

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

	a.  Paragraph 3-7a states 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.  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.

12.  Army Regulation 15-185 (Army Board for Correction of Military Records) prescribes the policies and procedures for correction of military records by the Secretary of the Army acting through the ABCMR.  Paragraph 2-9 states the ABCMR begins consideration of each case with the presumption of administrative regularity.  The applicant has the burden of proving an error or injustice by a preponderance of the evidence.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The specific facts and circumstances surrounding his separation are not available.  His DD Form 214 shows he was administratively separated under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-205, as early separation of an overseas returnee.  The characterization is listed as "Under Honorable Conditions."

2.  He has not provided any evidence to support his request.

3.  The regulation governing this Board's operation requires that the discharge process be presumed to have been in accordance with applicable law and regulations unless the applicant can provide evidence to overcome that presumption.

4.  In view of the foregoing there is no basis for granting the applicant's requested relief.

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)                                         AR20120009372



3


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20140021330



4


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1