IN THE CASE OF:	  

		BOARD DATE:	  1 September 2015

		DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20150001099 


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 correction of his DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release of Discharge from Active Duty) to show he was released from active duty with an honorable characterization of service.

2.  The applicant states his DD Form 214 shows his character of service as "uncharacterized."  However, he was issued orders that discharged him from the U.S. Army Reserve (USAR) Ready Reserve with an honorable discharge.  He states the characterization of his active duty service is preventing him from obtaining veterans' benefits.  He adds that he has been incarcerated about 
29 years (almost ever since he left military service) and his circumstances have affected him mentally.

3.  The applicant provides a copy of his DD Form 214 and discharge orders.

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 DD Form 4 (Enlistment/Reenlistment Document – Armed Forces of the United States) shows he enlisted in the USAR (Delayed Entry Program) on 21 June 1982 with a military service obligation (MSO) of 6 years.  He then enlisted in the Regular Army (RA) on 1 July 1982 for a period of 3 years.

3.  The applicant accepted nonjudicial punishment on two occasions:

* on 17 July 1982, for being disrespectful in deportment toward a superior noncommissioned officer (NCO)
* on 8 November 1982, for:

* leaving his appointed place of duty without authority
* failing to go at the time prescribed to his appointed place of duty
* disobeying a lawful order from a superior NCO

4.  Five DA Forms 4856 (General Counseling Forms) with dates ranging from 
2 November 1982 to 26 November 1982 show the applicant was counseled for:

* climbing in a laundry room window in violation of company policy
* missing two formations and being disrespectful to a superior NCO
* being at the Enlisted Men's Club without authorization/pass privileges
* breaking restriction imposed under Article 15, Uniform Code of Military Justice
* administrative separation under the Trainee Discharge Program

5.  On 26 November 1982, the applicant's company commander initiated action against him under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations – Enlisted Personnel), chapter 11 (Entry Level Performance and Conduct – Trainee Discharge Program).

   a.  The reasons for his proposed action were the applicant demonstrated character and behavior characteristics not compatible with satisfactory continued service.

	b.  The applicant was advised of his rights and the separation procedures involved.

   c.  He was also advised that, because he was in entry level status, the period of his service would be uncharacterized.

6.  The applicant consulted with legal counsel and was advised of the reasons for separation and the rights available to him.

   a.  He acknowledged that due to non-completion of the requisite active duty time benefits normally associated with completion of honorable active service would be affected.  He also acknowledged that he would not be permitted to apply for enlistment in the U.S. Army within 2 years of his separation.

   b.  He elected not to submit statements in his own behalf.

   c.  The applicant and his counsel placed their signatures on the document.

7.  The chain of command recommended approval of the applicant's separation action based on his entry level status performance and conduct.

8.  On 3 December 1982, the separation authority approved the commander's recommendation for discharge of the applicant, directed an entry level status separation of uncharacterized, and transfer of the applicant to the USAR (Individual Ready Reserve) to complete his MSO.

9.  The applicant's DD Form 214 shows he entered active duty on 1 July 1982; was released from active duty on 9 December 1982 under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 11, based on entry level performance and conduct; and was transferred to the USAR Control Group (Annual Training).  He had completed 5 months and 9 days of active service during this period.  It also shows in item 24 (Character of Service):  "Uncharacterized."

10.  USAR Personnel Center, St. Louis, MO, Orders D-06-050061, dated 
29 June 1988, honorably discharged the applicant from the USAR (Ready Reserve) effective 30 June 1988.

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

	a.  Chapter 3 (Character of Service/Description of Service) provides in:

		(1)  paragraph 3-7, 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.  Only the honorable characterization may be awarded to a Soldier upon completion of his/her period of enlistment or period for which called or ordered to active duty or active duty for training, or where required under specific reasons for separation, unless an entry level status separation (uncharacterized) is warranted; and

		(2)  paragraph 3-9, separation will be described as entry level with service uncharacterized if processing is initiated while a Soldier is in an entry level status.

	b.  Chapter 11 provides policy and guidance for the separation of personnel because of unsatisfactory performance or conduct while in an entry level status.  Personnel who enlisted in the RA are considered to be in an entry level status if, before the date of the initiation of separation action, they have completed no more than 180 days of continuous active duty.  Service of personnel separated under the provisions of this chapter will be described as "uncharacterized."

12.  Army Regulation 635-5 (Separation Documents) prescribes policies and procedures regarding separation documents.  It also establishes standardized policy for preparing and distributing the DD Form 214.  It states the DD Form 214 is a summary of a Soldier's most recent period of continuous active duty.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  Records show the applicant entered active duty in the RA on 1 July 1982.

	a.  The regulatory guidance shows that personnel who enlist in the RA are considered to be in an entry level status if, before the date of the initiation of separation action, they have completed no more than 180 days of continuous active duty.  The service of personnel separated under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 11, will be described as "uncharacterized."

   b.  On 26 November 1982, the applicant's company commander initiated separation action based on character and behavior characteristics demonstrated by the applicant that were not compatible with satisfactory continued service.
At that time, the applicant had completed less than 5 months (or 150 days) of active duty service.

   c.  The separation authority approved the separation action and directed an entry level status separation of "uncharacterized."  Accordingly, the applicant was discharged on 9 December 1982.  He was credited with completing 5 months and 9 days of net active service during the period of service under review.


2.  Records show the applicant's separation under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 11, based on entry level performance and conduct was administratively correct and in compliance with applicable regulations in effect at the time.  In addition, the character of service entered in item 24 of his DD Form 214 was proper and correct.

3.  The evidence of record shows the applicant was in an entry level status on the date of initiation of the separation action.  The governing Army regulation provides that the service will be described as "uncharacterized."  Therefore, the evidence of record does not support the applicant's contention that the character of service for the period under review should be corrected.

4.  An uncharacterized discharge is not meant to be a negative reflection of a Soldier's military service.  It merely means the Soldier has not been in the Army long enough for his or her character of service to be rated as honorable or otherwise.

5.  The applicant was transferred to the USAR Control Group (Annual Training) on 10 December 1982 and honorably discharged from the USAR Control Group (Ready Reserve) on 30 June 1988 based on completion of his MSO.  The evidence of record shows that upon completion of the period of the enlistment obligation, an honorable characterization of service is appropriate when the quality of the member's service has met the standards of acceptable conduct and performance of duty.

6.  Therefore, in view of the foregoing, there is no basis for correcting the character of service for the period of service under review.

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)                                         AR20150001099



3


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20150001099



6


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1