IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 1 December 2021 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20210005317 APPLICANT REQUESTS: in effect, upgrade of his general discharge to an honorable/medical discharge, and correction of his rank/grade. APPLICANT'S SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS CONSIDERED BY THE BOARD: * DD Form 149 (Application for Correction of Military Record) * DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) FACTS: 1. The applicant did not file within the three-year time frame provided in Title 10, United States Code, section 1552(b); however, the Army Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR) 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 was recruited into the Army, under the Delayed Entry Program, at 17 years of age. He graduated from MOS (military occupational specialty) 72E (Telecommunications) on top pf his class. A recruiter from the State Comptroller's Office in Texas requested he be given terminal leave, six months prior to his reenlistment. Because of his training, he feels his career was taken away from him. He wants six months prior to his time in service restored and all potential rank given until retirement. He also wants his second term of service discharge be made into a medical discharge. 3. The applicant’s service records are not available for review. An exhaustive search was conducted to locate the service records but they could not be found. The only document available is the document provided by the applicant. These documents are sufficient for the Board to conduct a fair and impartial review of this case. 4. The applicant's DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) shows: a. Having had prior service, he enlisted or reenlisted in the Regular Army on 26 July 1983. He held MOS 72E (Combat Telecommunications Center Operator) b. He was assigned to Headquarters and Headquarters Battery, Division Artillery, 2nd Infantry Division, Korea. c. The complete facts and circumstances surrounding his discharge are not available for review. His DD Form 214 shows he was discharged on 14 March 1984 under the provisions of chapter 13 (unsatisfactory performance) of Army Regulation (AR) 635-200 (Personnel Separations) with a general, under honorable conditions discharge. It also shows: * he held the rank/grade of private/E-1, with an effective date of 31 January 1984 * he completed 7 months and 19 days of active service, of which 7 months and 3 days was foreign service * he had 3 years of prior active service * he was awarded or authorized the Army Service Ribbon and the Marksman Marksmanship Qualification Badge with Rifle Bar d. The applicant does not provide explanation/clarification of and/or supporting evidence regarding his 6 months of terminal leave. e. The applicant does not provide supporting evidence to show he retired from the Army and/or that at the time of his separation from active duty in March 1984, he held a rank/grade higher than that shown on his DD Form 214. f. The applicant does not provide supporting evidence such as a medical diagnosis, a physical profile, or other medical evidence to specifically show what medical condition rendered him medically unfit and warranted a change of the narrative reason for his separation from unsatisfactory performance to disability separation. 5. By regulation (AR 15-185), the ABCMR begins its consideration of each case with the presumption of administrative regularity, which is that what the Army did was correct. The ABCMR is not an investigative body and decides cases based on the evidence that is presented in the military records provided and the independent evidence submitted with the application. The applicant has the burden of proving an error or injustice by a preponderance of the evidence. 6. By regulation (AR 635-5), the DD Form 214 is a summary of the Soldier's most recent period of continuous active duty. It provides a brief, clear-cut record of all current active, prior active, and prior inactive duty service at the time of release from active duty, retirement, or discharge. The information entered thereon reflects the conditions as they existed at the time of separation 7. MEDICAL REVIEW: a. The Army Review Board Agency (ARBA) Medical Advisor reviewed the supporting documents and the applicant’s medical records in the Armed Forces Health Longitudinal Technology Application (AHLTA) and Joint Legacy Viewer (JLV) and made the following findings and recommendations: Records do not contain a behavioral health diagnosis. At this time, documentation is insufficient to support requested changes. b. The applicant was discharged on 14 March 1984 under Chapter 13, Unsatisfactory Performance, with a General characterization. The basis for separation is unknown. The applicant is requesting an upgrade, medical discharge, and change to rank/grade. The applicant asserts he was discharged after being given terminal leave six months prior to reenlistment. However, then states “because of his training, he feels his career was taken away from him.” c. Due to the period of service, electronic active duty medical records are void. d. The applicant is service connected for medical issues; 10% for paralysis of nerve as of October 1984 and 10% for superficial scars as of March 2013. BOARD DISCUSSION: 1. After reviewing the application and all supporting documents, the Board found that relief was not warranted. The Board carefully considered the applicant's record of service, documents submitted in support of the petition and executed a comprehensive and standard review based on law, policy and regulation, and published Department of Defense guidance for liberal and clemency determinations requests for upgrade of his characterization of service. Upon review of the applicant’s petition, available military records and medical review, the Board concurred with the medical opinion finding insufficient evidence of in service mitigation to overcome the misconduct. He was discharged for unsatisfactory performance and was provided an under honorable conditions (General) characterization of service. The Board agreed that the applicant's discharge characterization is warranted as he did not meet the standards of acceptable conduct and performance of duty for Army personnel to receive an Honorable discharge. 2. The Board agreed the burden of proof rest on the applicant, however, he did not provide any supporting documentation and his service record has insufficient evidence to support the applicant contentions of a medical discharge, and correction of his rank/grade. Based on this, the Board determined relief was not warranted and denied relief. BOARD VOTE: Mbr 1 Mbr 2 Mbr 3 : : : GRANT FULL RELIEF : : : GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF : : : GRANT FORMAL HEARING XX XXX XX 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, 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 ABCMR to excuse an applicant's failure to timely file within the 3-year statute of limitations if the Army Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR) determines it would be in the interest of justice to do so. 2. Army Regulation 15-185 (ABCMR) prescribes the policies and procedures for correction of military records by the Secretary of the Army, acting through the ABCMR. The ABCMR begins its consideration of each case with the presumption of administrative regularity, which is that what the Army did was correct. The ABCMR is not an investigative body and decides cases based on the evidence that is presented in the military records provided and the independent evidence submitted with the application. The applicant has the burden of proving an error or injustice by a preponderance of the evidence. 3. Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations) sets forth the requirements and procedures for administrative discharge of enlisted personnel. Chapter 13 of this regulation provides for separation due to unsatisfactory performance when in the commander’s judgment the individual will not become a satisfactory Soldier; retention will have an adverse impact on military discipline, good order and morale; the service member will be a disruptive influence in the future; the basis for separation will continue or recur; and/or the ability of the service member to perform effectively in the future, including potential for advancement or leadership, is unlikely. Service of Soldiers separated because of unsatisfactory performance under this regulation will be characterized as honorable or under honorable conditions. 4. Army Regulation 635-5 (Separation Documents), in effect at the time, prescribed the separation documents that must be prepared for Soldiers upon retirement, discharge, or release from active duty service or control of the Active Army. It established standardized policy for preparing and distributing the DD Form 214. The DD Form 214 is a summary of a Soldier's most recent period of continuous active duty and provides the individual with documentary evidence of their military service. Blocks 4a and 4b will show the active duty rank and pay grade at time of the Soldier's separation; the rank is taken from the Soldier's promotion/reduction orders, and block 12h, shows the effective date of pay grade. //NOTHING FOLLOWS// ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20210005317 1 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 1