IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 10 April 2012 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20110020225 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 from the U.S. Army Reserve (USAR) to honorable. 2. The applicant states: * he would like his discharge upgraded to honorable for career advancement in law enforcement * he doesn't believe the record is in error or unjust * he believes after leaving active duty training he wasn't getting the same training at his unit * he was young and somewhat unsure of what he wanted to do as a career * he never received any disciplinary action while in the USAR * he has been a law enforcement officer since his discharge * he would like the board to take into consideration he has one more semester left for his 4-year degree and he is going to be promoted as an investigator 3. The applicant provides three character reference letters. 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 was born on 20 June 1977. He enlisted in the USAR on 29 February 2000 for a period of 8 years. 3. His record is void of the specific facts and circumstances surrounding his discharge. However, discharge orders show the applicant was issued a general discharge on 31 August 2004 under the provisions of Army Regulation 135-178 (Enlisted Administrative Separations). 4. On 13 August 2007, the Army Discharge Review Board denied his request for an honorable discharge. 5. He provides three character reference letters from two employers and a friend who attest: * the applicant worked as a deputy in the sheriff's office in North Carolina and he performed all duties assigned in a professional manner * the applicant has been an employee of the North Carolina Department of Corrections since October 2010 and he has conducted himself in a professional manner and has diligently performed all tasks assigned to him * he is dependable and a very good friend 6. Army Regulation 135-178 provides for the separation of enlisted personnel of the Army Reserve and Army National Guard. This regulation states 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 military personnel or is otherwise so meritorious that any other characterization would be clearly inappropriate. An honorable characterization may only be awarded to a Soldier upon completion of his or her service obligation or where required under specific reasons for separation unless an uncharacterized description is warranted. Characterization of service as general under honorable conditions is warranted when significant negative aspects of the Soldier's conduct or performance of duty outweigh positive aspects of the Soldier's military record. When authorized, a characterization of under honorable conditions is awarded to a Soldier whose military record is satisfactory but not sufficiently meritorious to warrant an honorable discharge. A characterization of under honorable conditions may be issued only when the reason for the Soldier's separation specifically allows such characterization. It will not be issued to Soldiers upon separation for expiration of their service obligation. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS: 1. The applicant contends he was young. However, age is not a mitigating factor. He was almost 23 years of age when he enlisted in the USAR and he served over 4 years in the USAR prior to his discharge. 2. He contends he would like his discharge upgraded for career advancement. However, a discharge is not upgraded for the purpose of enhancing employment opportunities. 3. The character reference letters provided by the applicant fail to show his discharge was unjust and should be upgraded. 4. In the absence of evidence to the contrary, it must be presumed his separation processing was administratively correct and in conformance with applicable regulations. Without the discharge packet to consider, it is presumed his characterization of service was commensurate with his overall record of service. As a result, there is no basis for granting the applicant's request. 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) AR20110020225 3 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 1 ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20110020225 2 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 1