RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


      IN THE CASE OF:


      BOARD DATE:        23 August 2007
      DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20070005499


      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.

|     |Ms. Catherine C. Mitrano          |     |Director             |
|     |Ms. Deyon D. Battle               |     |Analyst              |

      The following members, a quorum, were present:

|     |Mr. Lester Echols                 |     |Chairperson          |
|     |Mr. Richard T. Dunbar             |     |Member               |
|     |Mr. John T. Meixell               |     |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 that his discharge under other than honorable
conditions be upgraded to an honorable or a general discharge.

2.  The applicant states that he believes that his discharge should be
upgraded based on the fact that he served in the Army for 4 years with a
good record.  He states that he had one isolated incident which he regrets
and that he had no other adverse actions during his active duty career.  He
states that he now has a wife and three children and would serve in the
Army again, if he were able to, with a more sincere heart.  He states that
he submits this request with a sincere heart as he has changed his life
since he was on active duty.  He states that he wishes that he could go
back and do it all over again knowing what he knows today; however, all he
can do is ask for mercy in granting his request for an upgrade of his
discharge.  He states that he is older and wiser; and that he remains Army
now and forever.

3.  The applicant provides in support of his application, a copy of his
Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty (DD Form 214); and a
letter addressed to the Members of the Army Review Board dated 30 March
2007, from a former service member recommending that the applicant's
discharge be upgraded.

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

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
Army Board for Correction of Military Records (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.
While it appears the applicant did not file within the time frame provided
in the statute of limitations, the ABCMR has elected to conduct a
substantive review of this case and, only to the extent relief, if any, is
granted, has determined it is in the interest of justice to excuse the
applicant’s failure to timely file.  In all other respects, there are
insufficient bases to waive the statute of limitations for timely filing.

2.  On 5 September 1980, the applicant enlisted in the United States Army
Reserve (USAR) under the Delayed Entry Program in Denver, Colorado, for
6 years, in the pay grade of E-1.  He enlisted in the Regular Army for 3
years on 6 April 1981 and he successfully completed his training as a unit
supply specialist.

3.  The applicant was promoted to the pay grade of E-2 on 6 October 1981;
he was promoted to the pay grade of E-3 on 1 March 1983; and he was
promoted to the pay grade of E-4 on 1 January 1983.  He reenlisted in the
Army for 3 years on 23 January 1983.

4.  Nonjudicial punishment (NJP) was imposed against the applicant on
20 June 1984, for willfully disobeying a lawful order to remain on standby
duty to secure weapons from personnel returning from Honduras.  His
punishment consisted of a reduction to the pay grade of E-3 (suspended, to
be automatically remitted if not vacated before 19 October 1984), a
forfeiture of pay and extra duty.  The suspended portion of the applicant's
sentence was vacated on 6 August 1984, when the applicant failed to go to
his appointed place of duty on 1 August 1984.

5.  On 17 December 1984, NJP was imposed on the applicant for failure to go
to his appointed place of duty.  His punishment consisted of restriction
and extra duty.

6.  The available records indicate that the applicant was counseled on at
least eight separate occasions between 26 June 1984 and 2 May 1985 for
failure to report to duty; indebtedness; failure to report to formation;
failure to report to unit health and welfare inspection; appearance;
failure to maintain his area in the barracks; being out of uniform;
nonsupport of his dependents; and a possible bar to reenlistment.

7.  On 3 May 1985, the applicant's pass privileges were withdrawn because
of his failure to meet accepted standards of conduct and appearance.  He
was ordered to remain within the limits of the cantonment area when he was
in an off duty status except when he was specifically authorized by his
chain of command to leave the area for official military business.

8.  On 3 June 1985, NJP was imposed against the applicant for wrongfully
using marijuana and cocaine on 24 March 1985.  His punishment consisted of
a reduction to the pay grade of E-2 and correctional custody for 30 days.

9.  The applicant was barred from reenlistment on 28 June 1985.  His
commander cited his records of NJP and his numerous counselings as the
basis for his bar to reenlistment.






10.  On 8 July 1985, the applicant was counseled by his commanding officer
regarding his intent to initiate action which might result in his
separation from or retention in the United States Army for serious
misconduct under chapter 14.  He was informed that he had a right to
consult with counsel and to submit statements in his own behalf.

11.  On 15 July 1985, the applicant was notified that he was being
recommended for discharge under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200,
chapter 14, for  misconduct, due to abuse of illegal drugs.  He
acknowledged receipt of the notification and, after consulting with
counsel, he waived his rights and he opted not to submit a statement in his
own behalf.

12.  The appropriate authority approved the recommendation for discharge on
23 August 1985 and he directed the issuance of a discharge under other than
honorable conditions.  Accordingly, on 6 September 1985, the applicant was
discharged, under other than honorable conditions, under the provisions of
Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 14, for misconduct, due to abuse of
illegal drugs.  He had completed 4 years, 5 months and 1 day of net active
service.

13.  A review of the available records fails to show that the applicant
ever applied to the Army Discharge Review Board for an upgrade of his
discharge within that board's 15-year statute of limitations.

14.  Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the
separation of enlisted personnel.  Chapter 14 of the regulation deals with
separation for various types of misconduct, which includes drug abuse, and
provides that individuals identified as drug abusers may be separated prior
to their normal expiration of term of service. Individuals in pay grades E-
5 and above must be processed for separation upon discovery of a drug
offense.  Those in pay grades below E-5 may also be processed after a first
drug offense and must be processed for separation after a second offense.
The issuance of a discharge under other than honorable conditions is
normally considered appropriate.

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 his rights.

2.  The type of discharge directed and the reasons therefore were
appropriate considering all the facts of the case.
3.  The applicant's contentions have been noted.  However, they are not
substantiated by the evidence of record.  The available evidence indicates
that he had NJP imposed against him on three separate occasions and he was
counseled at least eight times while he was in the Army as a result of his
acts of indiscipline.  While he did serve in the Army for over 4 years, his
contention that he was discharged based on one isolated incident is without
merit.

4.  The recommendation that he submitted in support of his application has
also been noted.  However, it is not sufficiently mitigating to warrant the
relief requested.  It appears that the applicant was provided every
opportunity to serve honorably in the Army and he opted not to do so.
Considering his numerous acts of misconduct, the type of discharge that he
received appropriately characterizes his overall record of service.

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

6.  In view of the foregoing, there is no basis for granting the
applicant's request.

BOARD VOTE:

________  ________  ________  GRANT FULL RELIEF

________  ________  ________  GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

__LE____  __RTD___  __JTM__  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 for correction of the
records of the individual concerned.




                                  ____    Lester Echols_____
                                            CHAIRPERSON

                                    INDEX

|CASE ID                 |AR20070005499                           |
|SUFFIX                  |                                        |
|RECON                   |                                        |
|DATE BOARDED            |20070823                                |
|TYPE OF DISCHARGE       |                                        |
|DATE OF DISCHARGE       |                                        |
|DISCHARGE AUTHORITY     |                                        |
|DISCHARGE REASON        |                                        |
|BOARD DECISION          |DENY                                    |
|REVIEW AUTHORITY        |                                        |
|ISSUES         1.  626  |144.6000/MISCONDUCT                     |
|2.  672                 |144.6750/PATTERN OF MISCONDUCT          |
|3.  673                 |144.6770/ILLEGAL USE OF DRUGS           |
|4.                      |                                        |
|5.                      |                                        |
|6.                      |                                        |


-----------------------
[pic]