IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 16 November 2010 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20100014632 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 uncharacterized discharge be changed to an honorable or general discharge. 2. The applicant states he prefers an honorable discharge. He goes on to state that he is receiving service connected disability through the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) for the very reason that he was discharged and he would like to be recognized as a veteran. 3. The applicant provides a copy of a letter from the VA verifying that he receives disability benefits and 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 9 July 1991 for a period of 2 years and 22 weeks and training as a combat signaler. He completed his basic training at Fort Jackson, South Carolina and was transferred to Fort Gordon, Georgia to undergo his advanced individual training (AIT) on 9 September 1991. 3. On 12 November 1991, the applicant’s commander initiated action to discharge him from the service under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 11, due to entry level status performance and conduct. He indicated that the applicant could not meet the minimum standards prescribed for successful completion of training because of lack of aptitude, ability, motivation or self-discipline. He also stated the applicant had demonstrated character and behavior characteristics that were not compatible with satisfactory continued service and that the applicant had failed three diagnostic Army Physical Fitness Tests (APFT) and one “for record” APFT. He went on to state that despite the applicant’s participation in regular physical training “PT” sessions and remedial training, his scores actually declined, which was indicative of a lack of desire on the applicant’s part. 4. The applicant acknowledged receipt of the notification for discharge and waived his right to consult with counsel. He also elected not to submit a statement in his own behalf and declined a separation physical. 5. The appropriate authority approved the recommendation for discharge on 19 November 1991 and directed that the applicant be furnished an entry level separation with “Uncharacterized” service. 6. Accordingly, on 22 November 1991, the applicant was discharged under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 11-3a, due to entry level status and his service was “Uncharacterized.” He had served 4 months and 14 days (137 days) of active service and he had not completed his training. 7. Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 11 provides the policies and procedures for separating individuals who are in an entry level status (180 days or less) who cannot meet the minimum standards prescribed for successful completion of training because of lack of aptitude, ability, motivation or self-discipline. It provides that service under this provision will be uncharacterized unless the Secretary of the Army determines that a characterization of honorable is warranted by unusual circumstances involving personal conduct and performance of duty. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS: 1. The applicant’s administrative separation was accomplished in compliance with applicable regulations with no violations or procedural errors which would have jeopardized his rights. Accordingly, the type of discharge directed and the reasons therefore were appropriate considering all of the available facts of the case. 2. Inasmuch as he had less than 180 days of active service during his current enlistment, his service was properly uncharacterized and there appears to be no basis to characterize it as general or 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) AR20100014632 3 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 1 ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20100014632 3 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 1