RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


	IN THE CASE OF:	


	BOARD DATE:	  19 April 2007
	DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20060013872 


	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.


Mr. Gerard W. Schwartz

Acting Director

Ms. Joyce A. Wright

Analyst

The following members, a quorum, were present:


Mr. John N. Sloane

Chairperson

Mr. David K. Haasenritter 

Member

Mr. John G. Heck

Member

	The Board considered the following evidence:

	Exhibit A - Application for correction of military records.

	Exhibit B - Military Personnel Records (including advisory opinion, if any).


THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE:

1.  The applicant requests, in effect, that her discharge, characterized as under honorable conditions, be upgraded to honorable.

2.  The applicant states, in effect, that her discharge was based on one incident in seven years of otherwise honorable service.  She states that she was an outstanding Soldier.  Her accomplishments, located in her military personnel file, all show her dedication and devotion to duty for the US Army and her country.  Since her discharge, she has completed her Bachelors Degree and Masters in Education.  She is currently employed with the Halifax County School System teaching students.  She states that her job is very rewarding and continues to challenge her to excel.  She wants her children, family, and students to know that she served her country honorably and proudly and that one stupid mistake does not make her a bad person.  She states that one must learn from that mistake and rise up to live their dreams and goals.  She also wants to thank the US Army for teaching her to be dedicated, hardworking, and successful in all her endeavors.

3.  The applicant provides a copy of her DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty), a copy of an award certificate awarding her the Army Achievement Medal and Good Conduct Medal, and a copy of a Certificate of Achievement, in support of her request.

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  The applicant is requesting correction of an alleged error or injustice which occurred on 27 October 1988, the date of her discharge.  The application submitted in this case is dated 23 August 2006 but was received for processing on 3 October 2006.

2.  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 allows the Army Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR) to excuse failure to file within the 3-year statute of limitations if the ABCMR determines that it would be in the interest of justice to do so.  In this case, the ABCMR will conduct a review of the merits of the case to determine if it would be in the interest of justice to excuse the applicant’s failure to timely file.



3.  The applicant's record shows she enlisted in the Army Reserve, Delayed Entry Program on 19 May 1980.  She enlisted in the Regular Army on 20 August 1980, in the pay grade of E-3.  The applicant successfully completed basic combat training and advanced individual training at Fort Jackson, South Carolina. On completion of her OSUT (one station unit training), she was awarded the military occupational specialty (MOS), 71L, Administrative Specialist.   She was advanced to pay grade E-4 on 1 March 1982.  She served until she was honorably discharged on 31 March 1983, for immediate reenlistment.

4.  The applicant reenlisted on 1 April 1983, for 3 years.  She was promoted to pay grade E-5 effective 1 September 1984.  She served until she was honorably discharged on 1 April 1987.  She reenlisted on 2 April 1987, for 6 years, in pay grade E-5, with an established expiration of term of service (ETS) date of 1 April 1993.

5.  She was promoted to staff sergeant (SSG/E-6) effective 3 August 1987.

6.  On 3 May 1988, the applicant tested positive for cocaine.

7.  On 25 May 1988, the applicant attempted suicide.

8.  On 13 June 1988, the applicant was punished under Article 15, Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ), for wrongfully using cocaine.  Her punishment consisted of reduction to pay grade E-5 and a forfeiture of $560.00 per month for 2 months ($250.00 per month suspended for 2 months, until 10 August 1988).

9.  On 14 July 1988, the applicant's commander notified her he was initiating action to separate her from the service under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 14, paragraph 14-12c, for misconduct-drug abuse.  He based his recommendation on her positive urinalysis and attempted suicide. 

10.  The applicant acknowledged the notification on the same date.

11.  On 14 July 1988, the applicant's commander recommended that she be separated from the service under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 14-12c, for misconduct-drug abuse, prior to her ETS date.  He also included her attempted suicide.

12.  On 7 September 1988, the applicant was barred from reenlistment due to her Article 15, under UCMJ, and for her attempted suicide.

13.  The separation authority approved the recommendation for the applicant's discharge on 17 October 1988 and directed that she be issued a general discharge.  

14.  The applicant was discharged on 27 October 1988, under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 14, paragraph 14-12c, for misconduct-drug abuse.  She had completed 8 years, 2 months, and 8 days of creditable service.

15.  The applicant provides a copy of an award certificate for the Army Achievement Medal and the Good Conduct Medal.  These awards are shown on her DD Form 214.  She also provides a copy of a certificate of achievement which was awarded to her for exceptionally meritorious service during the period 2 November 1981 to 24 December 1981 while serving on active duty.  This certificate is also located in her military personnel service records.

16.  There is no evidence that the applicant applied to the Army Discharge Review Board (ADRB) for an upgrade of her discharge within its 15-year statute of limitations.
 
17.  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, and convictions by civil authorities.  Action will be taken to separate a member for 
misconduct when it is clearly established that rehabilitation is impracticable or is unlikely to succeed.  A discharge under other than honorable conditions is normally appropriate for a Soldier discharged under this chapter.

18.  Paragraph 14-12c(2) provides for the separation of Soldiers for commission of a serious offense such as the abuse of illegal drugs.  It also provides that individuals identified as first time drug abusers, grades E-5 through E-9, will be processed for separation upon discovery of a drug offense. 

19.  Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 3-7a, provides that an honorable discharge is a separation with honor and entitles the recipient to benefits provided by law.  The honorable characterization is appropriate when the quality of the member's service generally has met the standards of acceptable conduct and performance of duty for Army personnel, or is otherwise so meritorious that any other characterization would be clearly inappropriate.  Whenever there is doubt, it is to be resolved in favor of the individual.


DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant's administrative separation was accomplished in compliance with applicable regulations with no indication of procedural errors, which would tend to jeopardize her rights.  

2.  The type of discharge directed and the reasons therefore were appropriate
considering all of the facts of the case.

3.  The applicant has provided no evidence to show that her discharge was unjust.  She also has not provided any evidence to mitigate the character of her discharge.

4.  The evidence of record shows the applicant was discharged under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, Chapter 14, paragraph 14-12c, for misconduct-drug abuse.

5.  As a noncommissioned officer, in the rank of SSG, it is highly unlikely that the applicant was unaware of the Army's current Drug and Alcohol Policies.  The regulation in effect provided that first time abusers, in pay grades E-5 through 
E-9, would be separated upon discovery of a drug offense.  A discharge under other than honorable conditions was normally appropriate for a Soldier discharged under this chapter; however, the applicant received a general discharge, under honorable conditions.

6.  The applicant contends that she was an outstanding Soldier as evidence by her accomplishments, located in her military personnel file.  She elaborated on her post accomplishments, which consisted of completion of her Bachelors Degree and Masters in Education, and that she was currently employed as a teacher.  However, her post service conduct is not sufficient as a basis to upgrade her discharge, particularly in view of her misconduct offense, of drug abuse.  

7.  There is no evidence in the applicant's records, and the applicant has provided none, to show that she applied for an upgrade of her discharge to the ADRB within its 15-year statute of limitations.

8.  In order to justify correction of a military record, the applicant must show, to the satisfaction of the Board, or it must otherwise appear, that the record is in error or unjust.  The applicant has failed to submit evidence that would satisfy this requirement.

9.  Records show the applicant should have discovered the alleged error or injustice now under consideration on 27 October 1988; therefore, the time for the applicant to file a request for correction of any error or injustice expired on 26 October 1991.  The applicant did not file within the 3-year statute of limitations and has not provided a compelling explanation or evidence to show that it would be in the interest of justice to excuse failure to timely file in this case.

BOARD VOTE:

________  ________  ________  GRANT FULL RELIEF 

________  ________  ________  GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF 

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

__JH____  __S_____  __DKH__  DENY APPLICATION

BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION:

1.  The Board determined that 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 for correction of the records of the individual concerned.

2.  As a result, the Board further determined that there is no evidence provided which shows that it would be in the interest of justice to excuse the applicant's failure to timely file this application within the 3-year statute of limitations prescribed by law.  Therefore, there is insufficient basis to waive the statute of limitations for timely filing or for correction of the records of the individual concerned.




_____John N. Sloane_______
          CHAIRPERSON




INDEX

CASE ID
AR20060013872
SUFFIX

RECON
YYYYMMDD
DATE BOARDED
20070419
TYPE OF DISCHARGE
GD
DATE OF DISCHARGE
19881027
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY
AR 635-200, chap 14-12c 
DISCHARGE REASON

BOARD DECISION
DENY
REVIEW AUTHORITY

ISSUES         1.
144
2.

3.

4.

5.

6.