IN THE CASE OF:
BOARD DATE: 05 FEBRUARY 2009
DOCKET NUMBER: AR20080017926
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, in effect, that his general discharge be upgraded to an honorable discharge.
2. The applicant essentially states that his discharge should be upgraded because it has been over 17 years since his discharge, and that he wants to rejoin the United States Army Reserve (USAR).
3. The applicant provides no additional evidence in support of this application.
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 applicants 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 applicants failure to timely file. In all other respects, there are insufficient bases to waive the statute of limitations for timely filing.
2. The applicant's military records show that he enlisted in the USAR on
28 August 1989. He entered active duty for training on 2 November 1989, completed basic and advanced individual training, and was awarded military occupational specialty 76Y (Unit Supply Specialist). He was released from active duty on 16 March 1990 and reverted back to the 304th Military Police Company.
3. Although the applicant's complete separation packet was not contained in his military records, the available evidence shows that the applicant tested positive for cocaine during a urinalysis that was conducted on 11 April 1990 and tested on 17 April 1990. It also shows that on 11 October 1990, the applicant's commanding officer recommended that he be separated from the USAR under the provisions of Army Regulation 135-178 (Separation of Enlisted Personnel). The applicants commander also recommended that the applicant be discharged under honorable conditions. The reason for his proposed action was the applicant's positive drug urinalysis, his failure to enter a State-certified drug rehabilitation program as required, and his poor retention potential. Additionally, the available evidence shows that prior to recommending the applicant's discharge, his commander mailed correspondence to the applicant via certified mail informing him of his rights, and allowed him to make elections in regards to his pending separation action, but there is no indication that the applicant signed and returned any of the correspondence that was mailed to him.
4. Orders, dated 21 May 1991, discharged the applicant from the USAR effective that date, and show that he was issued a DD Form 257A (General Discharge Certificate Under Honorable Conditions).
5. There is no indication the applicant applied to the Army Discharge Review Board for an upgrade of his discharge within its 15-year statute of limitations.
6. Army Regulation 135-178 (Army National Guard and Army Reserve, Separation of enlisted Personnel), in effect at the time, provided that a Soldier who had been referred to a program of rehabilitation for personal drug or alcohol abuse could be separated for rehabilitation failure through inability or refusal to participate in, cooperate in, or successfully complete such a program if there was a lack of potential for continued Army service, or rehabilitation efforts were no longer practical. The service of Soldiers discharged under these provisions was to be characterized as honorable or under honorable conditions unless an entry level separation was required.
7. Army Regulation 135-178 provided, in pertinent part, that an honorable characterization of service was appropriate when the quality of the Soldier's service generally had met the standards of acceptable conduct and performance of duty for military personnel, or was otherwise so meritorious that any other characterization would have been clearly inappropriate.
8. Army Regulation 15-185 (Army Board for Correction of Military Records) prescribes the policies and procedures for correction of military records by the Secretary of the Army, acting through the ABCMR. This regulation provides that the ABCMR begins its consideration of each case with the presumption of administrative regularity. The applicant has the burden of proving an error or injustice by a preponderance of the evidence.
DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:
1. The applicant contends that his general discharge should be upgraded to an honorable discharge.
2. The applicant's contention that his discharge should be upgraded because it has been over 17 years since his discharge was considered. However, there has never been a provision of regulation which provided that a discharge would be upgraded after a certain amount of time, and the ABCMR does not upgrade discharges based solely on the passage of time.
3. The fact that the applicant wishes to rejoin the USAR is commendable. However, In order to justify correction of a military record, the applicant must show to the satisfaction of the Board, 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 and, in the absence of evidence to the contrary, it is presumed that the discharge proceedings were conducted in accordance with law and regulations applicable at the time.
4. The applicants record of illicit drug abuse does not meet the standards of acceptable conduct and performance of duty for Army personnel. Therefore, he is not entitled to an honorable discharge.
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 for correction of the records of the individual concerned.
_______ _XXX _______ ___
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) AR20080017926
3
ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
1
ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20080017926
4
ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
1
ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100015577
On 6 June 1994, the applicant was mailed notification that action to separate him from the USAR had been initiated under the provisions of Army Regulation 135-178, for misconduct abuse of illegal drugs. However, there is no evidence in his official military record that shows he was diagnosed with any mental conditions while he was in the Army. The evidence of record shows he was discharged due to a positive urinalysis result for cocaine use.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090006023
The applicant states, in effect, that when he had a positive urinalysis, he was told he had to go to a drug rehabilitation program that he had to pay for himself. It is evident that the applicant had a positive urinalysis for a controlled substance and, based on the characterization of his service, that he was separated due to misconduct - drug abuse. Based on the fact that the preponderance of evidence shows that the applicant was not provided the rights required when being processed for...
ARMY | DRB | CY2012 | AR20120023004
IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 29 May 2013 CASE NUMBER: AR20120023004 ___________________________________________________________________________ Board Determination and Directed Action After carefully examining the applicants record of service during the period of enlistment under review and considering the Discussion and Recommendation which follows, the Board determined the characterization of service was too harsh based on the recommendation for retention in the Army by all members of his...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | 20110009273
The unit commander further advised the applicant that he would recommend the applicant be separated from the USAR with an other than honorable conditions discharge in accordance with (IAW) paragraph 7-11.c.1 of Army Regulation 135-178 (Separation of Enlisted Personnel). On 17 April 1993, the applicant was formally notified by his company commander that separation action had been initiated to separate him from the USAR for misconduct abuse of illegal drugs, IAW paragraph 7-11.c.1 of Army...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100012200
The applicant requests an upgrade of his U.S. Army Reserve (USAR) discharge from under other than honorable conditions discharge to an honorable discharge. On 26 August 1994, by memorandum sent via certified mail, the applicant's immediate commander notified him of his intent to initiate separation action against him in accordance with chapter 7 of Army Regulation 135-178 (Separation of Enlisted Personnel) for misconduct commission of a serious offense (abuse of illegal drugs). On 27...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090003101
On 27 August 1990, the applicant's commander forwarded a request to discharge the applicant. 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. _______ _ _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.
ARMY | DRB | CY2013 | AR20130006370
The applicant requests an upgrade of his under other than honorable conditions discharge to honorable, and change the reason for separation code. The evidence of record shows that on 12 October 2010, the unit commander notified the applicant of initiation of separation action under the provisions of Chapter 13, AR 135-178, by reason of unsatisfactory participation, for missing at least 9 training assemblies within a one year period and failing to provide a valid excuse for his absences,...
ARMY | DRB | CY2013 | AR20130006307
IN THE CASE OF: Mr. BOARD DATE: 30 October 2013 CASE NUMBER: AR20130006307 ___________________________________________________________________________ Board Determination and Directed Action After carefully examining the applicants record of service during the period of enlistment under review and considering the Discussion and Recommendation which follows, the Board determined that the characterization of service was too harsh based on the applicants length and quality of his service to...
ARMY | DRB | CY2013 | AR20130015691
The Board found the overall length and quality of the applicant's service, to include his combat service, and the circumstances surrounding his discharge (i.e., the doctors confirmation that the medications were legitimate and the cause of the positive urinalysis; which was the reason for the applicants discharge, abuse of illegal drugs), mitigated the discrediting entry in his service record. Prior Board Review: No SUMMARY OF SERVICE: The applicant's record shows he enlisted in the US...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | 20110015802
The applicant requests upgrade of her general discharge to an honorable discharge. The board recommended the applicant be separated from the USAR in accordance with Army Regulation 135-178 (Army National Guard and Army Reserve Enlisted Administrative Separations), paragraph 7-11c(1), for misconduct - abuse of illegal drugs, with a general discharge. There is no evidence the applicant applied to the Army Discharge Review Board for an upgrade of her discharge within that board's 15-year...