BOARD DATE: 30 September 2014 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20140002669 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 (GD) be upgraded to an honorable discharge (HD). 2. The applicant states he was told that after six months his discharge would be automatically upgraded. His father had passed away and he was talked into going home to be with the family instead of staying in the Army. He was only 18 years old at the time and didn't know the procedure. He is trying to better himself and believes he was coerced into the separation action. 3. The applicant provides no supporting documentation. 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 21 January 1986, completed training, was awarded the military occupational specialty (MOS) 19D (Cavalry Scout), and was assigned to duty in Germany on 18 May 1986. 3. The available record includes the applicant's Cavalry Scout Job Book which contains no indication of completion of any of the Cavalry Scout MOS duty and advancement requirements. 4. The applicant received nonjudicial punishment (NJP) under Article 15, Uniform Code of Military Justice, for illegal possession of 12 rounds of live M-16 ammunition. 5. On 24 April 1987, his command recommended discharge under Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 13-5, for unsatisfactory performance. The recommendation cited a history of below standards duty performance. He was a constant source of trouble and a serious morale problem. On 16 February 1987, he had feigned a suicide attempt and on 7 April 1987 he received NJP. 6. The applicant acknowledged the proposed separation action and declined to make a statement on his own behalf. 7. The discharge authority approved the discharge recommendation and directed the applicant be discharged with a GD. 8. The applicant was discharged on 12 May 1987 with a GD. He had 1 year, 3 months, and 22 days of creditable service with no lost time. He is not shown to have received any personal awards, decorations, commendations, or citations. 9. The available record contains no evidence of the applicant's father's illness or death. 10. There is no indication the applicant applied for review of his discharge by the Army Discharge Review Board within its 15-year statutory limit. 11. Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel. It provides the following: a. Paragraph 3-7a states that an HD is a separation with honor. The honorable characterization of service is appropriate when the quality of the Soldier’s service has met the standards of acceptable conduct and performance of duty. b. Paragraph 3-7b states that a GD is a separation under honorable conditions issued to a Soldier whose military record was satisfactory but not so meritorious as to warrant an honorable discharge. c. Chapter 13 contains the policy and outlines the procedures for separating individuals for unsatisfactory performance, and provides, in pertinent part, that commanders will separate a member under this chapter when, in the commander's judgment, the member will not develop sufficiently to participate satisfactorily in further training and/or become a satisfactory Soldier. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS: 1. There is not now nor has there ever been any law or regulation that would allow for an automatic upgrade of a chapter 13 discharge. 2. The applicant's substandard duty performance, lack of completion of any of his MOS requirements, and NJP do not document that the applicant met the standards of acceptable conduct and performance of duty warranting a fully honorable discharge. 3. The applicant's administrative separation was accomplished in compliance with applicable regulations. The type of discharge directed and the reasons therefore were appropriate considering all the facts of the case. No relief is warranted. 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) AR20140002669 3 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 1 ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20140002669 4 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 1