IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 24 February 2020 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20180011311 APPLICANT REQUESTS: * a change in his narrative reason * a DD Form 215 (Correction to DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty)) APPLICANT'S SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS CONSIDERED BY THE BOARD: * DD Form 149 (Application for Correction of Military Record) * Self-Authored Statement 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 his DD Form 214, item 28 (Narrative Reason for Separation), ?Expeditious Discharge Program (EDP) (Failure to Maintain Acceptable Standards for Retention)? stricken or deleted from the record. The statement has prevented him from obtaining employment with decent livable wages. He was discharged for one incident, which was refusing KP (kitchen patrol or kitchen police) duty. He was selected for KP on multiple occasions. At the time he was a Helicopter Flight Crew Chief. Prior to this incident, he did not have any disciplinary issues or perform any criminal activities. His DD Form 214, item 28, has prevented him from obtaining good paying employment. His entire life he has had low paying jobs because of one incident while serving his country. In the future he would like to apply for a government job. 3. On 7 February 1979, at the age of 23 years old, the applicant enlisted in the Regular Army for a term of 3 years. After completing initial entry training and being awarded military occupational specialty (67V (Observation/Scout Helicopter Repairer), he was assigned to an overseas assignment in Germany. 4. He accepted nonjudicial punishment (NJP) on: * 22 June 1979, for, on three occasions, failing to go at the time prescribed to his appointed place of duty * 1 October 1979 for being absent without leave (AWOL) from 13 July 1979 and remaining absent until 13 August 1979 * January 1981 for missing movement (dates and signatures are illegible) 5. On 9 December 1980, he received formal counseling for failing to move out to the field to perform his duties (missing movement). He was also counseled regarding the types of adverse action he could receive for his misconduct. 6. The applicant underwent a medical examination and a mental status evaluation; both cleared him for separation. 7. The applicant's immediate commander notified the applicant that he was initiating separation actions against him under the provisions of Army Regulation (AR) 635-200 (Personnel Separations – Enlisted Personnel), paragraph 5-31 (Expeditious Discharge Program (EDP)). He stated the reasons for his proposed actions were the applicant demonstrated a complete lack of maturity. His ability to accept the military way of life as shown in the enclosures was not a tolerable trait for a Soldier in the U.S. Army. He recommended discharge because of his social and emotional inability to adapt. 8. The applicant acknowledged he had been notified of the pending separation action against him and he had been advised of the basis for the contemplated action, understood his rights, and elected not to submit statements in his own behalf. He voluntarily consented to the discharge and understood, prior to the date the discharge authority approved his discharge, he could withdraw his voluntary consent to the discharge. 9. The appropriate separation authority approved the recommendation for separation and directed that the applicant be issued a General Discharge Certificate. 10. On 21 April 1981, the applicant was discharged accordingly. He completed 2 years, 2 months, and 15 days of net active service this period. His DD Form 214, shows: * He was awarded or authorized: * Army Service Ribbon * Rifle Expert Marksmanship Qualification Badge * Separation Authority: AR 635-200, paragraph 5-31h(2) * SPD (Separation Program Designator): JGH * Narrative Reason for Separation: Expeditious Discharge Program (EPD) (Failure to Maintain Acceptable Standards for Retention) 11. He states he would like his DD Form 214, item 28 (Narrative Reason for Separation), ?Expeditious Discharge Program (EDP) (Failure to Maintain Acceptable Standards for Retention)? stricken or deleted from the record. The statement has prevented him from obtaining employment with decent livable wages. His record shows he enlisted at the age of 23 years old, he accepted three NJPs, and he was counseled on one occasion for missing movement. He served 2 years, 2 months, and 15 days of his 3 years contractual obligation. 12. In regards to the applicant receiving a DD Form 215, if the Board decides to grant his request for a change in his narrative reason and/or other corrections are made to his DD Form 214, he will receive a copy of a DD Form 215. 13. In 1973, the U.S. Army initiated the Expeditious Discharge Program as a test; it gave commanders the opportunity to separate unproductive Soldiers 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. The program required Soldiers to voluntarily accept discharge and they could receive either an honorable or general discharge. 14. AR 635-200, paragraph 5-31 (Expeditious Discharge Program): Commanders could separate Soldiers under this program when they demonstrated they could/would not meet the Army's accepted standards for enlisted personnel, based on one or more of the following: having a poor attitude, lack of motivation, lack of self-discipline, inability to adapt socially or emotionally, or failure to demonstrate promotion potential. They had to have served at least 6, but not more than 36 months. Soldiers were not separated unless they voluntarily accepted discharge, and they could receive either an honorable or an under honorable conditions (general) character of service. 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. 15. AR 635-5 (Personnel Separations ––Separation Documents) states for DD Form 214, item 28, enter the reason for separation shown in AR 635-5-1 (Personnel Separations –– Separation Program Designators) based on the regulatory or statutory authority. 16. AR 635-5-1 states the reason ?Expeditious Discharge Program (EDP), (Failure to Maintain Acceptable Standards for Retention)? is designated for authority AR 635-200, paragraph 5-31. 17. The applicant requests an upgrade so that he may receive benefits. The ABCMR is not authorized to grant requests for upgrade of discharges solely for the purpose of making the applicant eligible for veterans' benefits; however, in reaching its determination, the Board can consider the applicant's petition, his service record, and his statements in light of the published guidance on equity, injustice, or clemency. BOARD DISCUSSION: 1. The Board carefully considered the applicant’s request, supporting documents, evidence in the records, regulatory requirements, and published DoD guidance for consideration of discharge upgrade requests. The Board considered the applicant’s statement, his record of service, the frequency and nature of his misconduct, and the character and reason for his separation. The Board noted the facts presented above. The Board found insufficient evidence of in-service mitigation to overcome the misconduct and there was insufficient post-service evidence to justify a clemency determination. The Board found the character of service equitable under the circumstances. Based on a preponderance of evidence, the Board determined that there was no error or injustice in the applicant’s discharge or character of service, or basis for clemency. 2. After reviewing the application and all supporting documents, the Board found that relief is not warranted. BOARD VOTE: Mbr 1 Mbr 2 Mbr 3 : : : GRANT FULL RELIEF : : : GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF : : : GRANT FORMAL HEARING : : : 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. 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. The Department of the Army began testing the Expeditious Discharge Program (EDP) in October 1973. In a message, dated 8 November 1974, the Deputy Chief of Staff for Personnel announced the expansion of the EDP. 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. 3. Army Regulation (AR) 635-200 (Personnel Separation – Enlisted Personnel) in effect at the time, set forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel. Paragraph 5-31 (Expeditious Discharge Program). Commanders could separate Soldiers under this program when they demonstrated they could/would not meet the Army's accepted standards for enlisted personnel, based on one or more of the following: having a poor attitude, lack of motivation, lack of self-discipline, inability to adapt socially or emotionally, or failure to demonstrate promotion potential. They had to have served at least 6, but not more than 36 months. Soldiers were not separated unless they voluntarily accepted discharge, and they could receive either an honorable or an under honorable conditions (general) character of service. Interim Change 4 to Army Regulation 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. 4. AR 635-5 (Personnel Separations ––Separation Documents) prescribed the separation documents which are prepared for individuals upon retirement, discharge, or release from active military service or control of the Army states for DD Form 214, item 28, enter the reason for separation shown in AR 635-5-1 (Personnel Separations –– Separation Program Designators) based on the regulatory or statutory authority. 5. AR 635-5-1 prescribed specific authorities (regulatory, statutory, or other directives, and reasons for separation of all members of the Active Army, Army National Guard, and the U.S. Army Reserve on active duty, active duty for training (ADT), initial active duty for training (IADT), or full-time training duty (FTTD). It states the reason ?Expeditious Discharge Program (EDP), (Failure to Maintain Acceptable Standards for Retention.? is designated for authority AR 635-200, paragraph 5-31, as well as Separation Program Designator code ?JGH.“ 6. On 25 July 2018, the Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness issued guidance to Military Discharge Review Boards and Boards for Correction of Military/Naval Records (BCM/NRs) regarding equity, injustice, or clemency determinations. Clemency generally refers to relief specifically granted from a criminal sentence. BCM/NRs may grant clemency regardless of the type of court-martial. However, the guidance applies to more than clemency from a sentencing in a court- martial; it also applies to other corrections, including changes in a discharge, which may be warranted based on equity or relief from injustice. a. This guidance does not mandate relief, but rather provides standards and principles to guide Boards in application of their equitable relief authority. In determining whether to grant relief based on equity, injustice, or clemency grounds, BCM/NRs shall consider the prospect for rehabilitation, external evidence, sworn testimony, policy changes, relative severity of misconduct, mental and behavioral health conditions, official governmental acknowledgement that a relevant error or injustice was committed, and uniformity of punishment. b. Changes to the narrative reason for discharge and/or an upgraded character of service granted solely on equity, injustice, or clemency grounds normally should not result in separation pay, retroactive promotions, and payment of past medical expenses or similar benefits that might have been received if the original discharge had been for the revised reason or had the upgraded service characterization. //NOTHING FOLLOWS// ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20180011311 4 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 1 ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20180011311 6 ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20180011311 5