IN THE CASE OF: 

		BOARD DATE: 28 June 2023

		DOCKET NUMBER: AR20220010116


APPLICANT REQUESTS:  correction of his total active service from 1 year, 11 months, 
and 20 days of active service to 2 years of active service (10 days of service credit).  

APPLICANT'S SUPPORTING DOCUMENT(S) CONSIDERED BY THE BOARD:

*	DD Form 149 (Application for Correction of Military Record)
*	DD Form 293 (Application for the Review of Discharge)
*	DD Form 214 (certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty)

FACTS:

1.  The applicant did not file within the 3-year time frame provided in Title 10, U.S. 
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 asked to be separated at the 24-month mark. However, the 
paperwork to separate him was expedited and he was separated 10 days early. He was 
told this would not affect his Department of Veterans Affairs benefits. But now, his 
Certificate of Eligibility (COE) will not be released because his active service was 10 
days short of 24 months. A change to his length of service, by crediting him with 10 
days, would allow the release of his COE.  

3.  Review of the applicant’s service records shows: 

	a.  He enlisted in the Regular Army for 4 years on 10 June 1983. He was assigned 
to a unit in Hawaii on 5 November 1983. 

	b.  He accepted nonjudicial punishment under Article 15 on/for: 

*	20 March 1984, twice failing to go at the time prescribed
*	11 July 1984, failing to go at the time prescribed and being disrespectful in 
language 
*	1 March 1985, disobeying a lawful order 
   c.  On 25 April 1985, the applicant’s immediate commander notified him that he is 
considering initiation of separation action against him in accordance with chapter 13 of 
Army Regulation (AR) 635-200 (Personnel Separations-Enlisted Separations) 
unsatisfactory performance and specifically, misconduct that included disciplinary 
infractions, and the ability to perform duties effectively in the future, including potential 
for advancement or leadership, is unlikely.

	d. He acknowledged the letter of notification from his commander by signing it.  He 
consulted with counsel and was advised of his rights. He acknowledged: 

*	he had been advised of the basis for the contemplated separation action 
under the provisions of chapter 13 of AR 635-200
*	he had been advised of the effect on future enlistments in the Army, the 
possible effects of a general discharge and of the procedures and rights that 
were available to him
*	he understood if he were issued a general discharge, he could expect to 
encounter substantial prejudice in civilian life

	e.  After the applicant's acknowledgement and consultation with counsel, his 
immediate commander-initiated separation action against him due to unsatisfactory 
performance.  

	f.  On 24 May 1985, the separation authority approved his separation and directed 
the applicant to receive a general, under honorable conditions character of service.

	g.  On 16 May 1985, Headquarters, U.S. Army Support Command, Schofield 
Barracks, HI published orders 108-5 ordering his reassignment to the Army Separation 
Point for separation processing effective 29 May 1985. 

	h.  On 29 May 1985, the applicant was discharged. His DD Form 214 shows he was 
discharged under the provisions of AR 635-200, chapter 13, for unsatisfactory 
performance, and issued a general, under honorable conditions characterization of 
service. His DD Form 214 shows he completed 1 year, 11 months, and 20 days of 
active service. 

4.  Soldiers are subject to separation under the provisions of chapter 13, when he or 
she is unqualified for further military service because of unsatisfactory performance.  An 
honorable or under honorable conditions (general) discharge was an appropriate and 
authorized characterization of service. 

5.  The DD Form 214 is a summary of a Soldier's most recent period of continuous 
active duty.  It provides a brief, clear-cut record of active-duty service at the time of 
release from active duty, retirement, or discharge.
BOARD DISCUSSION:

After reviewing the application, all supporting documents, and the evidence found within 
the military record, the Board found that relief was not warranted. The Board carefully 
considered the applicant's request, the former service members record of service, 
documents submitted in support of the petition and executed a comprehensive and 
standard review based on public law, policy and regulation. The Army has an interest in 
maintaining the integrity of its records for historical purposes.  The information in those 
records must reflect the conditions and circumstances that existed at the time the 
records were created. The applicant is advised the DD Form 214 shows circumstances 
as they were on the date prepared. Upon review of the applicant’s petition and available 
military records, the Board determined there was insufficient evidence of an error or 
injustice to warrant relief in this case. As such, the Board denied relief.


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.
	 

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 ABCMR determines it would be in 
the interest of justice to do so.

2.  Army Regulation 635-5 (Separation Documents) establishes the standardized policy 
for preparing and distributing the DD Form 214. The purpose of the separation 
document is to provide the individual with documentary evidence of his or her military 
service. The DD Form 214 is a summary of a Soldier's most recent period of continuous 
active duty. It provides a brief, clear-cut record of active-duty service at the time of 
release from active duty, retirement, or discharge, and is not intended to have any legal 
effect on termination of a Soldier's service. Chapter 2 states Block 12c (Net Active 
Service This Period) is the total active service completed from date of entry in Block 12a 
(Date Entered Active Duty This Period) to date of separation in Block 12b (Separation 
date This Period) less any lost time. 

3.  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. 
Paragraph 2-9 contains guidance on the burden of proof. It states 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.  

//NOTHING FOLLOWS//
ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)	AR20220010116


1
ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1