ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 26 September 2019 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20180005144 APPLICANT REQUESTS: reconsideration of his previous request for an upgrade of his characterization of service from under honorable conditions to honorable. APPLICANT'S SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS CONSIDERED BY THE BOARD: DD Form 149 (Application for Correction of Military Record) FACTS: 1. Incorporated herein by reference are military records which were summarized in the previous consideration of the applicant's case by the Army Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR) in Docket Number AR20100030089 on 11 July 2011. 2. The applicant states that his discharge was supposed to be a hardship discharge. At the time, his oldest child was a premature baby and his wife needed him home to help take care of child. 3. A review of the applicant’s service records shows the following: a. He enlisted in the Regular Army on 23 February 1977. b. His DA Form 2-1 (Personnel Qualification Record) reflects he was declared absent without leave (AWOL) from 5 December 1977 to 1 January 1978. c. On 22 February 1978, the applicant accepted non-judicial punishment (NJP) under the provisions of Article 15 for one specification of AWOL from 5 December 1977 to on/about 2 January 1978. His punishment consisted in part, reduction to private (PVT/E-1). d. On 8 March 1978, his immediate commander notified him that action was being initiated to separate him under the provisions of AR 635-200, paragraph 5-31 (Expeditious Discharge Program), based on his inability to adjust to military life. e. He acknowledge receipt of the notification of separation and the commander’s intent to separate him under the provisions of AR 635-200, paragraph 5-31 on 10 March 1978. He further acknowledged: * he voluntarily consented to this discharge * he may expect to encounter substantial prejudice in civilian life f. Subsequent to the applicant's acknowledgement, on 10 March 1978, the immediate commander formally initiated separation action against the applicant under the provisions of paragraph 5-31 of AR 635-200, Expeditious Discharge Program. g. On 10 March 1978, the chain of command reviewed the separation recommendation and subsequently recommended approval of the separation with a characterization of service as under honorable conditions. h. On 14 March 1978, following a legal review for legal sufficiency, the separation authority approved the recommendation for separation under the Expeditious Discharge Program under the provisions of AR 635-200, paragraph 5-31 and ordered his service be characterized as under honorable conditions (general). l. On 20 March 1978, the applicant was discharged from active duty under the provisions of AR 635-200, paragraph 5-31 with a general under honorable conditions characterization of service. He completed 1 year and 1 day of active duty service. He had 27 days of lost time from 5 December 1977 to 1 January 1978. His DD Form 214 shows in: * item 9a (Type of Separation), Discharge * item 9c (Authority and Reason), AR 635-200, paragraph 5-31 * item 9e (Character of Service), Under Honorable Conditions (General) 4. There is no indication that the applicant applied to the Army Discharge Review Board for an upgrade of his discharge within its 15-year statute of limitations. 5. The applicant previously applied to the ABCMR for a discharge upgrade. On 11 July 2011, the Board denied his request and determined that there is no evidence and the applicant did not provide any to show that he applied for and was denied a hardship discharge. The evidence of record shows he was properly and equitably discharged in accordance with regulations in effect at the time. His commander notified him of the reason and the type of discharge that was recommended. He voluntarily consented to the proposed discharge. 6. By regulation AR 635-200, in effect at that time, states paragraph 5-31 of this regulation provided for the discharge of enlisted personnel 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. The regulation provided that 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. BOARD DISCUSSION: After reviewing the application and all supporting documents, the Board found relief was not warranted. Board members considered the applicant’s petition and statement under the DOD FY2018 guidance. Board members saw that he was AWOL twice and felt he did not cross the boundary for an honorable discharge. Board members determined the applicant's record shows he was charged with the commission of an offense punishable under the UCMJ with a punitive discharge, and that discharges under the provisions of AR 635-200, chapter 10, are voluntary requests for discharge in lieu of trial by court- martial. He voluntarily, willingly, and in writing, requested discharge from the Army in lieu of trial by court-martial. All requirements of law and regulation were met and his rights were fully protected throughout the separation process. Board members felt that he did not provide anything to justify his upgrade. 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 that the overall merits of this case are insufficient as a basis to amend the decision of the ABCMR set forth in Docket Number AR20100030089 on 11 July 2011. 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. Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations – Enlisted Personnel), then in effect, set forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel. Paragraph 5-31 of this regulation provided for the discharge of enlisted personnel 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. The regulation provided that 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. a. Provides that those Soldiers processed under the EDP may be released from active duty and transferred to the Individual Ready Reserve to complete their military obligation if deemed to have the potential for service under conditions of full mobilization. Soldiers deemed to have no potential for useful service under conditions of full mobilization were to be discharged. b. 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. //NOTHING FOLLOWS// ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20180005144 4 1