BOARD DATE: 26 January 2017 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20150014934 BOARD VOTE: _________ _______ ________ GRANT FULL RELIEF ________ ________ ________ GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF ________ ________ ________ GRANT FORMAL HEARING ____x____ ___x_____ ____x____ DENY APPLICATION 2 Enclosures 1. Board Determination/Recommendation 2. Evidence and Consideration BOARD DATE: 26 January 2017 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20150014934 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. BOARD DATE: 26 January 2017 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20150014934 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 (GD) to an honorable discharge (HD). 2. The applicant states the Army policies concerning financial matters were not explained to him prior to his discharge. His discharge was based on returned checks written by him without knowledge his spouse had taken all of his money out of the bank. He was not given enough time to honor the checks and was given a "bad discharge." He is enrolled as a full-time student trying to better himself. He was denied Department of Veteran Affairs (VA) educational benefits due to his discharge status. This request is very important to him, his family, and his endeavors as an American citizen. He asks that his request be processed as quickly as possible. 3. The applicant does not provide any additional evidence. 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 April 1987. 3. Records show he received counseling on several occasions for: * failure to obey orders * dishonored checks * dereliction of duty * failure to report to his appointed place of duty after class * failure to report to duty * failure to wear appropriate uniform 4. He accepted nonjudicial punishment (NJP) under the provisions of Article 15 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) on 24 April 1989 for failing to obey lawful orders on or about 14 February 1989 and 20 March 1989. 5. On 9 June 1989, he was notified by his immediate commander that discharge action was being initiated against him under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations - Enlisted Separations), paragraph 13-2a, for unsatisfactory performance. He acknowledged receipt. 6. On 16 June 1989, he was advised by counsel of the basis for the contemplated action to separate him for unsatisfactory performance under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200. He elected not to submit a statement in his own behalf. He further indicated that he understood he might expect to encounter substantial prejudice in civilian life if a general discharge was issued to him. 7. On 23 June 1989, an authorized official approved his discharge under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 13, and directed the issuance of a General Discharge Certificate. On 14 July 1989, he was discharged accordingly. 8. The DD Form 214 he was issued confirms he was discharged under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 13, for unsatisfactory performance with an under honorable conditions characterization of service. 9. The Army Discharge Review Board denied his request for an upgrade of his discharge on 10 December 1991. REFERENCES: Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the requirements and procedures for administrative discharge of enlisted personnel. a. Chapter 13 of this regulation provides for separation due to unsatisfactory performance when in the commander's judgment the individual will not become a satisfactory Soldier; retention will have an adverse impact on military discipline, good order and morale; the service member will be a disruptive influence in the future; the basis for separation will continue or recur; and/or the ability of the service member to perform effectively in the future, including potential for advancement or leadership, is unlikely. Service of Soldiers separated because of unsatisfactory performance under this regulation will be characterized as honorable or under honorable conditions. b. Paragraph 3-7a provides that 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. DISCUSSION: 1. The applicant contends his discharge was based on returned checks; however, the evidence shows he was counseled on multiple occasions for different infractions and he accepted NJP under the provisions of Article 15 of the UCMJ on 24 April 1989 for failing to obey lawful orders on or about 14 February 1989 and 20 March 1989. 2. The evidence also shows his separation process was accomplished in compliance with applicable regulations and there is no evidence of procedural errors that would have jeopardized his rights. //NOTHING FOLLOWS// ABCMR Record of Proceedings AR20150000953 Enclosure 1 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20150014934 2 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Enclosure 1 ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20150014934 3 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Enclosure 2