IN THE CASE OF:	  

		BOARD DATE:	  27 January 2015

		DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20140010246 


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, issued on 4 November 1986, be upgraded to a fully honorable discharge.

2.  The applicant states that during the period in question he was young and very easily influenced, but he has since matured and he has served with honor on several deployments to Iraq and Afghanistan.

3.  The applicant provides copies of his DD Forms 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) and his Noncommissioned Officer Evaluation Reports (NCOERs).

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 records, though somewhat incomplete, show he enlisted in the Regular Army on 10 October 1984.  He completed his training as a cannon crewman and was transferred to Panama on 4 February 1985.

3.  The facts and circumstances surrounding his administrative discharge are not present in the available records.  However, his DD Form 214 for this period of service shows he was discharged under honorable conditions, on 4 November 1986, under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 13, for unsatisfactory performance, in pay grade E-1.  He had served 2 years and
25 days of active service.

4.  On 24 June 2003, he enlisted in the Maryland Army National Guard (MDARNG).  He was ordered to active duty in support of Operation Iraqi Freedom on 7 June 2005 and deployed to Kuwait/Iraq during the period 20050807 – 20060430.  He was released from active duty (REFRAD) on 28 July 2006.

5.  He was again ordered to active duty in support of Operation Iraqi Freedom on 22 May 2007 and deployed to Iraq during the period 20070818 – 20080411.  He reenlisted on 1 November 2007 for a period of 6 years and a selected Reserve incentive program bonus in the amount of $15,000.  He was REFRAD on 29 July 2008 and on 25 November 2008 he was transferred to the New Jersey Army National Guard.

6.  On 13 July 2009, he was honorably discharged from the Army National Guard and on 14 July 2009, he enlisted in the U.S. Army Reserve (USAR).  On 
21 November 2009, he was ordered to active duty in support of Operation Enduring Freedom.  He deployed to Afghanistan during the period 20091129 – 20101128 and he was REFRAD on 3 April 2011. 

7.  He has remained in the USAR and was promoted to pay grade E-6 on 
1 October 2012.

8.  There is no evidence to show that he applied to the Army Discharge Review Board for an upgrade of his discharge within that board’s 15-year statute of limitations.

9.  Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the policy for the separation of enlisted personnel.  Chapter 13, in effect at the time, established policy and provided guidance for eliminating enlisted personnel for unsatisfactory performance and who were unsuitable for further military service.  An individual could be separated for unsatisfactory performance if it was determined that the member will not develop sufficiently to participate satisfactorily in further training and/or become a satisfactory Soldier.  A discharge under honorable conditions is normally considered appropriate.

10.  Paragraph 3-7a of 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.  In the absence of evidence to show otherwise, it must be presumed that the applicant’s administrative separation under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 13, was administratively correct and in conformance with applicable regulations with no indication of any violations of the applicant’s rights.  Accordingly, the type of discharge directed and the reasons therefore were appropriate under the circumstances.

2.  Absent the facts and circumstances surrounding his discharge, it would be inappropriate to make a determination that his service during the period in question warrants an upgrade of his discharge to a fully honorable characterization.

3.  While the applicant’s subsequent service in the Reserve Components has been successful and is appreciated, it does not in itself serve to show that his first period of service in the Regular Army warrants a characterization of fully honorable.

4.  Accordingly, there appears to be no basis to grant his request to upgrade his general discharge, issued on 4 November 1986, to fully honorable.

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)                                         AR20140010246



3


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20140010246



2


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1