IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 7 June 2018 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20160008219 BOARD VOTE: Mbr 1 Mbr 2 Mbr 3 : : : 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: 7 June 2018 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20160008219 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 under honorable conditions discharge to a fully honorable discharge. 2. The applicant states it has been over a year and he would like his discharge to be upgraded. 3. The applicant provides no 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 10 March 1976. 3. Evidence contained in the applicant's record shows he was counseled on 7 February 1997 for substandard performance and his attitude towards the Army. He was also counseled on 9 February 1977 for being late for extra duty. 4. The applicant's immediate commander notified him that he intended to recommend his discharge from the Army under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations – Enlisted Personnel), paragraph 5-37 (Expeditious Discharge Program (EDP)), by reason of poor attitude, lack of self-discipline, and failure to demonstrate promotion potential. His immediate commander noted: a. The applicant had been a detriment to the operation of the Mortar Platoon for the last nine months. His slovenly appearance during duty in garrison and on the field and his total disregard for his own personal development on and off duty created major morale problems in his platoon. b. The applicant was disrespectful and unresponsive to correction both formally and informally. He had been counseled by every member of his Chain of Command. During the most recent inspection is appearance and level of knowledge were so reprehensible he was specifically cited by the deputy inspector general as being unsuitable for continued active service. 5. The applicant acknowledged notification of his proposed discharge from the Army. He consulted with legal counsel and he was advised of the basis for the contemplated separation from the Army, the effect on future enlistment in the Army, the possible effects of a general discharge, and the procedures and rights available to him. He voluntarily consented to this discharge. He also elected not to submit a statement in his own behalf. 6. On 11 July 1977, an authorized official approved the applicant's discharge under the provisions of paragraph 5-37 of Army Regulation 635-200 by reason of failure to meet acceptable standards for continued military service and directed the issuance of a General Discharge Certificate. On 22 July 1977, the applicant was discharged accordingly. His DD Form 214 (Report of Separation from Active Duty) shows he completed 1 year, 4 months, and 13 days of active military service. 7. There is no evidence the applicant applied to the Army Discharge Review Board for an upgrade of his discharge within its 15-year statute of limitations. REFERENCES: Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel. It provides: a. That a member who has committed an offense or offenses for which the authorized punishment includes a punitive discharge may submit a request for discharge for the good of the service in lieu of trial by court-martial at any time after the charges have been preferred. An under other than honorable conditions discharge is normally considered appropriate. b. An honorable discharge is given when the quality of the Soldier’s service has generally met standards of acceptable conduct and duty performance. c. A general discharge is a separation from the Army under honorable conditions. When authorized, it is issued to a Soldier whose military record is satisfactory but not sufficiently meritorious to warrant an honorable discharge. DISCUSSION: 1. The U.S. Army does not have, nor has it ever had, a policy to automatically upgrade discharges. Each case is decided on its own merits when an applicant requests a change in discharge. Changes may be warranted if the Board determines that the characterization of service, the reason for discharge, or both were improper or inequitable. 2. The evidence of record shows the applicant demonstrated that he could not or would not meet acceptable standards required of enlisted personnel for continued military service. Accordingly, his immediate commander initiated separation action against him and he voluntarily consented to his discharge. 3. His separation was accomplished in compliance with applicable regulations with no indication of procedural errors which would have jeopardized his rights. The separation authority determined his service had not risen to the level required to be characterized as honorable. 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. 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. //NOTHING FOLLOWS// ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20160008219 2 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20160008219 4 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Enclosure 2