| Mr. Carl W. S. Chun | Director | |
| Mr. Edmund P. Mercanti | Analyst |
| Mr. Samuel A. Crumpler | Chairperson | |
| Mr. Mark D. Manning | Member | |
| Mr. Robert L. Duecaster | Member |
APPLICANT REQUESTS: That his general discharge be upgraded to fully honorable.
APPLICANT STATES: That he has been clean and sober for 11 years and would now like to have his discharge upgraded.
EVIDENCE OF RECORD: The applicant's military records show:
He enlisted in the Regular Army on 15 August 1984. He was awarded the military occupational specialty of infantryman and was promoted to pay grade
E-3.
On 1 October 1985, the applicant accepted nonjudicial punishment (NJP) for testing positive for cocaine on a urinalysis test.
On 16 October 1985, the applicant accepted NJP for again testing positive for cocaine on a urinalysis test.
The applicant’s commander then initiated action to discharge him for misconduct, drug abuse. The applicant was notified of his rights in conjunction with his commander’s recommendation, and opted to waive those rights.
On 25 November 1985, the applicant (then in pay grade E-1) was issued a General Discharge Certificate for misconduct, drug abuse.
Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel. Chapter 14 establishes policy and prescribes procedures for separating members for misconduct. Specific categories include minor disciplinary infractions, a pattern of misconduct, commission of a serious offense, convictions by civil authorities, desertion or absence without leave, and drug abuse. Action will be taken to separate a member for misconduct when it is clearly established that rehabilitation is impractical or is unlikely to succeed. While an honorable or general discharge is authorized for soldiers who are separated due to misconduct, an under other than honorable discharge is normally considered appropriate.
DISCUSSION: Considering all the evidence, allegations, and information presented by the applicant, together with the evidence of record and applicable law and regulations, it is concluded:
1. The applicant does not challenge the validity of his two positive urinalyses, nor does he challenge the appropriateness of his discharge. However, the Board has reviewed both of these issues and finds no error in them.
2. While it is commendable that the applicant has recognized he had a problem with illegal drugs, and has now achieved prolonged abstinence from these substances, this realization and abstinence is not sufficient to warrant upgrading his discharge. Since a soldier discharged for misconduct is normally issued an under other than honorable discharge, the fact that the applicant was issued a general discharge is indicative that he was already afforded leniency for his actions. To now upgrade his discharge to fully honorable would be inequitable to soldiers who completed their complete terms of service without any record of misconduct.
3. In view of the foregoing, there is no basis for granting the applicant's request.
DETERMINATION: The applicant has failed to submit sufficient relevant evidence to demonstrate the existence of probable error or injustice.
BOARD VOTE:
________ ________ ________ GRANT
________ ________ ________ GRANT FORMAL HEARING
___mdm _ ___sac__ ___rld ___ DENY APPLICATION
| CASE ID | AR2002083166 |
| SUFFIX | |
| RECON | YYYYMMDD |
| DATE BOARDED | 20030508 |
| TYPE OF DISCHARGE | (HD, GD, UOTHC, UD, BCD, DD, UNCHAR) |
| DATE OF DISCHARGE | YYYYMMDD |
| DISCHARGE AUTHORITY | AR . . . . . |
| DISCHARGE REASON | |
| BOARD DECISION | DENY |
| REVIEW AUTHORITY | |
| ISSUES 1. | A60.00 |
| 2. | A92.21 |
| 3. | A93.17 |
| 4. | |
| 5. | |
| 6. |
ARMY | BCMR | CY2007 | 20070004226
The DD Form 214 (Armed Forces of the United States Report of Transfer or Discharge or Certificate of Release or Discharge From Active Duty) the applicant was issued at the time of his discharge confirms he was discharged and his characterization of service was under honorable conditions. Individuals in pay grades E-5 and above must be processed for separation upon discovery of a drug offense. As a result, the Board further determined that there is no evidence provided which shows that it...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2003 | 2003086448C070212
The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein. APPLICANT REQUESTS: That his discharge under other than honorable conditions be upgraded to a general discharge. On 13 May 1994, the Army Discharge Review Board denied the applicant’s request for an upgrade of his discharge.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140014833
The applicant requests her general, under honorable conditions discharge be upgraded to honorable. The DD Form 214 she was issued shows she was discharged under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 9, by reason of drug abuse - rehabilitation failure, with an under honorable conditions characterization of service. There is no evidence the applicant applied to the Army Discharge Review Board for an upgrade of her discharge within its 15-year statute of limitations.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090003175
The commander also advised the applicant that the proposed separation could result in a general discharge or an honorable discharge. He stated the evidence of record indicated that the urinalysis was done properly. Therefore, it is apparent the applicant's commander considered the applicant's overall record of service when he recommended a general discharge instead of a discharge under other than honorable conditions.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2007 | 20070015057
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 22 January 2008 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20070015057 I certify that hereinafter is recorded the true and complete record of the proceedings of the Army Board for Correction of Military Records in the case of the above-named individual. The applicant requests that her general discharge under honorable conditions be upgraded to an honorable discharge. By issuing a general discharge under honorable conditions, it is evident that the applicant's...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2005 | 20050004255C070206
The applicant states, in effect, that the Army Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR) should investigate whether the urinalysis book used by his unit was lost prior to his discharge, and contends that, if so, his positive urinalysis tests were not valid. On 24 December 1985, the appropriate authority directed the applicant receive a discharge under other than honorable conditions under the provisions of chapter 14 of Army Regulation 635-200 for misconduct - abuse of drugs. He was...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2007 | 20070005722C071029
Carmen Duncan | |Member | The Board considered the following evidence: Exhibit A - Application for correction of military records. On 10 May 1985, the applicant’s commander advised him he was being considered for elimination under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 14 for misconduct. On 7 June 1985, the applicant was discharged, with a general discharge, in pay grade E-5, under the provisions of Army Regulation 635- 200, chapter 14, for misconduct – drug abuse.
NAVY | DRB | 1999_Navy | ND99-01200
ND99-01200 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 990913, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to general/under honorable conditions. Documentation In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the applicant, was considered:Copy of DD Form 214 Letter confirming completion of Alcohol and Drug Recovery Program dated August 30, 1999 Character reference letter from St. Andrew's...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002069319C070402
During one of the counseling sessions, the applicant admitted to the first sergeant, in the presence of a witness, that his friends at Fort Bragg had repeatedly used marijuana in his apartment and offered that as the basis for his positive urinalysis. After hearing testimony and reviewing the evidence presented, the board found that the applicant was undesirable for further retention in the military service because of abuse of illegal drugs and recommended that he be discharged under other...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2003 | 03094545C070212
On 18 February 1986 the applicant's commanding officer notified her that he was initiating proceedings to administratively separate her from the Army under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 14-12c, misconduct – abuse of illegal drugs. She made a statement calling attention to her many years of good, responsible, and loyal service to the Army, and her participation in numerous off duty events, indicating that she deserved a discharge of at least under honorable conditions....