IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 21 November 2017 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20160003979 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 IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 21 November 2017 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20160003979 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. IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 21 November 2017 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20160003979 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 his under honorable conditions (general) discharge be upgraded to an honorable discharge. 2. The applicant states he was drafted out of high school and had problems adjusting to military life because of the culture change. He experienced depression and nervousness. 3. The applicant provides a copy of his DD Form 214 (Armed Forces of the United States Report of Transfer or Discharge) for the period ending 29 March 1972. 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 inducted into the Army of the United States on 11 November 1971. He entered active duty on the same date. 3. An undated statement from the applicant's officer in charge indicates the applicant had been a poor student since starting with the Wheel Vehicle Mechanics Course on 31 January 1972. He was twice recycled without productive results and had a very poor attitude. 4. The applicant's immediate commander notified him, on 8 February and 28 February 1972, of the conditions jeopardizing his promotion potential under the Qualitative Management Program (QMP) Extension to grades E-1 and E-2. He was eligible for promotion to E-2 on 11 March 1972 and was counseled regarding his unsatisfactory grades and possible elimination from the service under the provisions of Army Regulation 600-200 (Enlisted Personnel Management System), chapter 4. 5. The applicant's immediate commander recommended the applicant be barred from reenlistment on 3 March 1972 by reason of his unsatisfactory performance in the Wheel Vehicle Mechanics Course. The commander noted all rehabilitative actions had failed. The applicant did not submit a statement in his own behalf. 6. The applicant's commander recommended his discharge on 14 March 1972 under the provisions of Army Regulation 600-200, chapter 4, for failure to qualify for and attain promotion. His commander recommended he receive a general discharge. His commander rated him as "good" for conduct and "unsatisfactory" for efficiency. The applicant had no record of punishment under the provisions of Article 15, Uniform Code of Military Justice, while in the unit. 7. The applicant’s intermediate commander recommended approval of his separation on 15 March 1972 based on his failure to demonstrate adequate potential for promotion advancement. 8. The approval authority approved the applicant's recommended discharge on 17 March 1972 based on his failure to qualify for and attain promotion and directed the issuance of a General Discharge Certificate. 9. The applicant was discharged on 29 March 1972. The DD Form 214 he was issued confirms he was discharged under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 4, for failure to demonstrate adequate potential for promotion. He was credited with 4 months and 19 days of total active service and his service was characterized as under honorable conditions (general). 10. There is no indication he applied to the Army Discharge Review Board for an upgrade of his discharge within its 15-year statute of limitations. REFERENCES: 1. Army Regulation 600-200, chapter 4, (Enlisted Personnel Management System), then in effect, set forth policy and prescribed procedures for denying reenlistment under the QMP. That program was based on the premise that reenlistment was a privilege for those whose performance, conduct, attitude, and potential for advancement met Army standards. It was designed to enhance the quality of the career enlisted force, selectively retain the best qualified Soldiers to 30 years of active duty, deny reenlistment to non-progressive and nonproductive Soldiers, and encourage Soldiers to maintain their eligibility for further service. Department of the Army (DAPE-MPP) Message Number 242110Z, dated September 1971, extended the provisions of the QMP to allow for the early separation of Soldiers in the grades of E-1 and E-2 who had failed to demonstrate adequate potential for promotion advancement. 2. Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations – Enlisted Personnel) sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel. a. Paragraph 3-7a states 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. b. Paragraph 3-7b states that a general discharge is a separation from the Army under honorable conditions. When authorized, it is issued to Soldiers whose military record is satisfactory but not sufficiently meritorious to warrant an honorable discharge. 3. Army Regulation 635-200, then in effect, paragraph 5-37, states commanders who elect not to promote a Soldier to E-2 or E-3 may elect to initiate separation. Normally, an honorable discharge will be awarded unless the Soldier's conduct clearly substantiates a general discharge. DISCUSSION: 1. The applicant requests an upgrade of his under honorable conditions (general) discharge to honorable. 2. The evidence of record shows the applicant was denied promotion to E-2 and separated for failure to demonstrate adequate potential for promotion. The characterization of his service was commensurate with the reason for discharge and in accordance with the governing regulations in effect at the time. 3. In accordance with regulatory guidance, an honorable discharge would be awarded unless the Soldier's conduct clearly substantiates a general discharge. The applicant had no record of non-judicial punishment; however, his commander rated him as "good" for conduct and "unsatisfactory" for efficiency. //NOTHING FOLLOWS// ABCMR Record of Proceedings AR20150000953 Enclosure 1 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20160003979 2 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Enclosure 1 ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20160003979 4 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Enclosure 2