IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 14 June 2011 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20100027392 THE BOARD CONSIDERED THE FOLLOWING EVIDENCE: 1. Application for correction of military records (with supporting documents provided, if any). 2. Military Personnel Records and advisory opinions (if any). THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE: 1. The applicant requests reconsideration of his previous request to correct his narrative reason for separation. 2. The applicant states, in effect, the Board's denial of his previous application has pained him. He has a side in this matter and feels he did not get an opportunity to defend himself. He further contends, in effect, that: a. the Board's assessment that his service was "undistinguished service" was rude and inaccurate. b. becoming a distinguished Soldier is a journey, as is building any career, undertaken one step at a time with setbacks; c. he was selected supernumerary when he was chosen for guard duty and received a letter from the colonel; he worked hard and achieved all first-time goes on his Soldier's skills assessment; d. he won Soldier of the Month at the Field Artillery Board, but missed out on competing for Soldier of the Quarter or Year because he was transferred to another unit that did not offer these opportunities; e. being written up for being "too cool" was unfounded, degrading, and excessive, and bleeds with petty jealousy; f. he, like anyone, made his own mistakes and maybe a lack of discretion was one of them; g. his roommates blew pot smoke in his face while he slept. He failed a fake "UA" [interpreted to mean a unit urinalysis]; h. he had no opportunity for rehabilitation; i. he was continuously denied advanced training and when he went to his battery commander the nightmare really began; he wanted to Soldier and take advantage of what the Army had to offer; j. he requested to appear before the Board to defend himself, but he was denied the opportunity; he is not asking for a handout, he just wanted to be heard; k. he does not understand why he cannot file some form to have the statute of limitations waived; and l. he believes he has given 100 percent and then some. 3. The applicant provides no additional documentation. CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE: 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 AR20100000704, on 15 July 2010. 2. The applicant has presented new argument concerning the positive aspects of his military service which is new evidence that must now be considered by the Board. 3. The previous Record of Proceedings (ROP) noted: a. the 3-year statute of limitations was waived allowing the Board to fully consider the applicant's request. b. the applicant successfully completed training as a fire support specialist and advancement to private first class, pay grade E-3. c. the applicant enlisted in the Regular Army on 25 June 1986. He underwent his one-station unit training (OSUT) at Fort Sill, OK and remained assigned there for his first and only permanent duty assignment. d. that on 13 November 1987, the applicant’s commander notified him he was initiating action to separate him from the service under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations - Enlisted Personnel), paragraph14-12c, for commission of a serious offense - abuse of illegal drugs. He cited the basis for his recommendation was the applicant tested positive marijuana, he had an AWOL offense, poor performance, lack of discipline, and he failed to respond to numerous counseling sessions. The applicant had also 13 negative counseling sessions by his chain of command. His commander advised him that he was recommending that his service be characterized as general under honorable conditions. e. that after consulting with defense counsel, the applicant elected not to submit a statement in his own behalf and he declined a separation medical examination. f. that the appropriate authority approved the recommendation for discharge on 1 December 1987 and directed that he be furnished a General Discharge Certificate. g. accordingly, he was discharged under honorable conditions on 7 December 1987, under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 14-12c by reason of misconduct - abuse of illegal drugs. 4. The previous ROP failed to discuss the applicant's request to appear before the Board. 5. A review of the applicant's military records failed to produce evidence indicating that he received any decorations, certificates or letters of commendation, or appreciation, or service medals. He did receive the Army Service Ribbon, Expert Marksmanship Qualification Badge with Grenade Bar, and the Marksman Marksmanship Qualification Badge with Rifle Bar. 6. Army Regulation 15-185 (Army Board for Correction of Military Records) provides that applicants do not have a right to a hearing before the ABCMR. The Director of the ABCMR may grant a formal hearing whenever justice requires. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS: 1. The applicant contends his previous request to correct his narrative reason for separation should be reconsidered because he was not afforded the opportunity to defend himself before the Board. He also believes the Board only looked at the negative side of his service and ignored his positive accomplishments. 2. The applicant requested a personal appearance before the Board; however, there is sufficient evidence in the available record to fully consider this case, a formal hearing is not warranted. Unfortunately, the initial ROP failed to mention this issue or to explain to the applicant that his appearance before the Board was not necessary for the Board to make a fair and balanced determination. 3. The ROP cited the statute regarding the 3-year limitation placed on the Board for the review of applications. It also stated that in the interest of justice, it had elected to conduct a substantive review of the applicant's case. This, in effect, waived the 3-year statute of limitations. 4. The applicant's contention that he was selected supernumerary of the guard; received a letter from the colonel; achieved all first time goes on his Soldier's skills assessment, won Soldier of the Month at the Field Artillery Board, and received a letter of merit, have been noted. These accomplishments are not normally filed in a Soldier's Official Military Personnel File. Accordingly, they were not available for review by the previous Board, and were not provided for review at this time. However, it is unlikely that these accomplishments would have been sufficient to change the outcome of the previous Board. 5. The applicant has not provided any new documentation or convincing argument concerning his desire to have his narrative reason for separation changed. Accordingly, the previous Board's findings and determination should stand. 6. In view of the above, the applicant's request for reconsideration to change the narrative reason for his discharge should be denied. BOARD VOTE: ________ ________ ________ 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 AR20100000704, dated 15 July 2010. _______ _ __X_____ ___ CHAIRPERSON 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. ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20100027392 3 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 1 ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20100027392 2 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 1