IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 31 May 2012 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20110024127 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 upgrade of his general discharge to an honorable discharge. 2. The applicant states he desires his general discharge be upgraded to an honorable discharge because for 20 years he has suffered the dishonor of the bad decision he made as a child. 3. The applicant provides a copy of his DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) and a copy of his 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 was born on 27 November 1974 and he enlisted in the U.S. Army Reserve (USAR) in Baltimore, MD on 24 December 1993, for a period of 8 years. At the time of his enlistment he acknowledged that he understood he would be required to attend all scheduled unit training assemblies (UTA) (at least 48 per year) unless he was excused by proper authority and that if he accrued nine or more unexcused absences during any 365 day period he may be declared an unsatisfactory participant and may be transferred to the Individual Ready Reserve (IRR) under honorable conditions. 3. He was ordered to active duty for training (ADT) on 28 January 1994 and he was transferred to Fort Knox, KY to undergo his basic training. He completed that training and he was transferred to Fort Gordon, GA to undergo his advanced individual training (AIT) as a telecommunications center operator. 4. He successfully completed his AIT and he was released from ADT on 1 June 1994 and transferred back to his USAR unit in Baltimore. He served 4 months and 4 days of creditable active service with his character of service as uncharacterized. 5. On 8 October 1996, the applicant was discharged from the USAR under the provisions of Army Regulation 135-178 (Enlisted Administrative Separations) with a general discharge. The specific facts and circumstances surrounding his discharge are not present in the available records. However, the applicant's record shows that during the period of 15 February to 13 August 1995 he accrued 10 unauthorized absences. 6. Army Regulation 135-178, in effect at the time, set forth the basic authority for the separation of USAR and Army National Guard personnel. Chapter 6 of that regulation provides for the separation of personnel because of unsatisfactory performance. It provides that the service of a Soldier separated under this chapter will be characterized as honorable or general, under honorable conditions as warranted by his or her military record. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS: 1. In the absence of evidence to the contrary, it must be presumed that 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. The applicant's contentions have been considered. However, given the repeated nature of his unauthorized absences during his period of service they are not sufficiently mitigating to warrant an upgrade of his discharge. His service simply does not rise to the level of a fully honorable discharge and he was almost 22 years of age at the time. 3. Additionally, since either an honorable or a general discharge was authorized and since he received a general discharge, it appears his overall record of service was considered during his separation processing. 4. In view of the foregoing, there is an insufficient evidentiary 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 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) AR20110024127 3 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 1 ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20110024127 2 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 1