ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


IN THE CASE OF: 
BOARD DATE: 26 September 2019 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20170018067

APPLICANT REQUESTS:  a change in his narrative reason for discharge.

APPLICANT'S SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS CONSIDERED BY THE BOARD:

   * DD Form 149 (Application for Correction of Military Record)
   * DD Form 214 (Report of Separation From Active Duty) FACTS:
1. The applicant did not file within the three year time frame provided in Title 10, United States Code (USC), section 1552 (b); however, the Army Board for Correction of Military Records conducted a substantive review of this case and determined it is in the interest of justice to excuse the applicant's failure to timely file.

2. The applicant states he would like the separation narrative on his DD Form 214 (Report of Separation from Active Duty) changed. The applicant states he was told that he couldn’t deal with the Army life and he has not been able to get a government job due to the reason and authority for his discharge. He states he was passed basic training and left because he could not get emergency leave to see his father after his father lost his eye sight. He also states he was told he could not get a good job or pension from the government, he applied for Veteran Affairs (VA) benefits.

3. A review of the applicant’s service record shows the following:

   a. On 16 September 1977, he enlisted in the Regular Army.

   b. The applicant's immediate commander notified the applicant on 12 July 1978 that he was initiating action to separate him from service under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations – Enlisted Personnel), paragraph 5-31 (Expeditious Discharge Program (EDP), with a General Discharge Certificate. As reasons for the proposed separation action, the applicant's commander cited academically eliminated from three military occupational specialty (MOS) producing courses, denied advance promotion to PV2 because he was a below average Soldier, inability to demonstrate an acceptable aptitude for successful completion of his present
   a. 

military obligation is evidence that his retention in the military is clearly of no value to the US Army.

   c. The applicant acknowledged receipt of the proposed separation notification on 12 July 1978.  He consented to this discharge.  He acknowledged:

* he understood if he were issued a General Discharge under honorable conditions, he might expect to encounter substantial prejudice in civilian life
* he acknowledged he had been provided the opportunity to consult with an officer of the Judge Advocate General's Corps
* he acknowledged that if he declined to accept this discharge voluntarily, he might at a future time, if his conduct so warrants, be subject to separation under other provisions of law or regulation
* he elected not to submit a statement in his own behalf

   d. On 12 July 1978, the immediate commander initiated separation action against the applicant under the provisions of paragraph 5-31 of AR 635-200 citing the applicant's poor attitude, lack of motivation, and lack of self-discipline.

   e. On 1 August 1978, the separation authority approved an EDP under the provisions of paragraph 5-31, Army Regulation 635-200 and directed issuance of a Honorable Discharge Certificate, DD Form 256A.

   f. On 3 August 1978, the applicant was discharged from active duty. His DD Form 214 shows he was discharged under the provisions of paragraph 5-31 of AR 635-200 with an under honorable discharge. He was assigned Separation Code JGH (Expeditious Discharge Program). He completed 7 months and 27 days of active service. It also shows he was authorized or awarded the Marksman Marksmanship Qualification Badge with Rifle (M-16).

4. By regulation, commanders with the ability to request expeditious elimination of substandard, nonproductive Soldiers before board or punitive action becomes necessary. These provisions are intended to relieve unit commanders of the administrative burden normally associated with processing eliminations for cause through administrative discharge boards by providing a means to discharge such personnel expeditiously before they progress to the point where board or punitive action becomes necessary.

5. In reaching its determination, the Board can consider the applicant’s petition and his service record in accordance with the published equity, injustice, or clemency determination guidance.
1. 

BOARD DISCUSSION:

After reviewing the application and all supporting documents, the Board found relief was not warranted. In reaching its determination, the Board did consider the applicant’s petition and his service record in accordance with the published equity, injustice, or clemency determination guidance (DOD FY2018 Guidance).  Board members noted from the applicant's records that he demonstrated that he could not or would not meet acceptable standards required of enlisted personnel because of his inability to meet acceptable standards for continued military service. Accordingly, his immediate commander initiated separation action against him and he voluntarily consented to his discharge. Board members believed the separation was accomplished in compliance with applicable regulations with no indication of procedural errors which would tend to jeopardize his rights. The type of discharge directed and the reason for separation therefore were appropriate considering all the facts of the case. He gives no reason or justification to change the reason for his separation.

BOARD VOTE:

Mbr 1
Mbr 2
Mbr 3

:
:
:
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 the overall merits of this case are insufficient as a basis for correction of the records of the individual concerned

10/17/2019

X	
CHAIRPERSON
Signed by: 

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.


REFERENCES:
1. Title 10, USC, section 1552(b), provides that applications for correction of military records must be filed within three 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 three-year statute of limitations if the ABCMR determines it would be in the interest of justice to do so.

2. Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations – Enlisted Personnel sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel. Chapter 5 of the regulation in effect at the time provided for the discharge of enlisted personnel who had completed at least 6 months but less than 36 months of active duty and who had demonstrated that they could not or would not meet acceptable standards required of enlisted personnel in the Army because of the existence of one or more of the following conditions: poor attitude, lack of motivation, lack of self-discipline, inability to adapt socially or emotionally, or failure to demonstrate promotion potential. No individual would be discharged under this program unless the individual voluntarily consented to the proposed discharge. Individuals discharged under this regulation were issued either a general or honorable discharge. Interim Change 4 to AR 635-200, dated 1 April 1982, eliminated the requirement to obtain the Soldier's consent for separation under the provisions of the Expeditious Discharge Program.

   a. Paragraph 1-9d (Honorable Discharge) states an honorable discharge is a separation with honor. Issuance of an honorable discharge will be conditioned upon proper military behavior and proficient performance of duty during the member's current enlistment or current period of service with due consideration for the member's age, length of service, grade, and general aptitude.

   b. Paragraph 1-9e (General Discharge) states a general discharge is a separation from the Army under honorable conditions of an individual whose military record is not sufficiently meritorious to warrant an honorable discharge. When a member's service is characterized as general, except when discharged by reason of misconduct, unfitness, or unsuitability.

3. The Department of the Army began testing the Expeditious Discharge Program in October 1973. In a message, dated 8 November 1974, the Deputy Chief of Staff for Personnel announced the expansion of the Expeditious Discharge Program. The program provided for the separation of Soldiers whose acceptability, performance of duty, and/or potential for continued effective service fell below the standards required for retention in the Army. Soldiers could be separated under this program when subjective evaluation of their commanders identified them as lacking qualities for continued military service because of attitude, motivation, self-discipline, inability to adapt socially or emotionally, or failure to demonstrate promotion potential. An honorable or general discharge was required and there has never been any provision for an automatic upgrade of a discharge less than fully honorable.
1. 

4. The Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness issued guidance to Military Discharge Review Boards and Boards for Correction of Military/Naval Records on 25 July 2018, regarding equity, injustice, or clemency determinations. Clemency generally refers to relief specifically granted from a criminal sentence. Boards for Correction of Military/Naval Records may grant clemency regardless of the court-martial forum. However, the guidance applies to more than clemency from a sentencing in a court-martial; it also applies to any other corrections, including changes in a discharge, which may be warranted on equity or relief from injustice grounds.

NOTHING FOLLOWS