IN THE CASE OF:
BOARD DATE: 24 September 2009
DOCKET NUMBER: AR20090007244
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 his discharge be upgraded to honorable.
2. The applicant states he barely finished high school and flunked out of junior college. When his father told him to get out of the house, he joined the Army as a last resort. He completed initial entry training without any problems, but when he arrived at his first permanent duty station at Fort Hood, he began hanging around the wrong type of people. He began drinking, partying, and using marijuana. He received nonjudicial punishment. Now, some 10 years later, he has straightened himself out. He doesnt drink or take drugs, and he has a good job. He is a father, will soon graduate from college, and is an upstanding American citizen.
3. The applicant provides a personal letter, dated 11 April 2009.
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 applicants DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) shows he served in the Regular Army from 26 March 1997 through 12 March 1999, a period of 1 year, 11 months, and 17 days. It shows he served as an ammunition specialist with the 664th Ordnance Company, Fort Hood, TX. It further shows he was separated with a general under honorable conditions discharge under the provisions of paragraph 14-12b, Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations), for misconduct.
3. The applicant's discharge packet is not available. However, he petitioned the Army Discharge Review Board (ADRB) seeking a discharge upgrade. The ADRB considered his case on 1 September 2004. The case review shows the applicant received field grade nonjudicial punishment (NJP) on 12 June 1998 for a positive urinalysis test. His chain of command recommended he be discharged under other than honorable conditions; however, the approving authority approved a general discharge.
4. Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel. Essentially, it states an honorable discharge is a separation with honor and is appropriate when the quality of the Soldiers service is so meritorious that any other characterization would be clearly inappropriate. 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. Action will be taken to separate a member for misconduct when it is clearly established that rehabilitation is impracticable or is unlikely to succeed.
5. 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 members service generally has met the standards of acceptable conduct and performance of duty for Army personnel (emphasis added) or is otherwise so meritorious that any other characterization would be clearly inappropriate.
DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:
1. The applicant requests that his general discharge be upgraded to an honorable discharge.
2. The applicant tested positive for illegal drugs during a urinalysis test. He received NJP and was processed for administrative discharge under the provisions of chapter 14 of Army Regulation 635-200 for misconduct.
3. The discharge proceedings were conducted in accordance with law and regulations applicable at that time. The applicants separation was accomplished in compliance with applicable regulations with no indication of procedural errors which would tend to jeopardize his rights. The overall quality of the applicants service does not warrant recharacterization of his discharge to fully honorable.
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.
__________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) AR20090007244
3
ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
1
ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20090007244
2
ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
1
ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100024246
The applicant again accepted NJP on 4 May 1994 for failing to go at the time prescribed to his appointed place of duty. When authorized, it is issued to a Soldier whose military record is satisfactory but not sufficiently meritorious to warrant an honorable discharge. ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20100024246 3 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 1 ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20100024246 2 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD...
ARMY | DRB | CY2012 | AR20120020279
The evidence shows that on 13 October 2010, the unit commander notified the applicant of initiation of separation action under the provisions of Chapter 14, paragraph 14-12c, AR 635-200, for receiving a field grade Article 15 on 18 August 2010, for wrongfully using D-Amphetamines and D-Methamphetamines. The intermediate commander reviewed the proposed action and recommended approval of the separation with a general, under honorable conditions discharge. On 25 October 2010, the separation...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | 20110015517
THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE: 1. The counselor concurred with the commander's recommendation to discharge the applicant under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations), Chapter 9, and stated the applicant felt he was unable to rehabilitate himself. Accordingly, his chain of command initiated separation proceedings based on Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 9, drug and alcohol rehabilitation failure.
ARMY | DRB | CY2012 | AR20120022342
Discharge Received: General, Under Honorable Conditions c. Date of Discharge: 7 March 2001 d. Reason/Authority/SPD/RE Code: Misconduct, AR 635-200, Chapter 14-12c(2), JKK RE-3 e. Unit of assignment: Headquarters and Headquarters Service Battery 2d Battalion, 20th Field Artillery, 4th Infantry Division (Mechanized), Fort Hood, Texas f. Current Enlistment Date/Term: 8 May 2001, 4 years g. Current Enlistment Service: 1 year, 10 months, 0 days h. Total Service: 1 year, 10 months, 0 days i. ...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090011714
On 14 October 1997, the company commander notified the applicant that he was initiating action to separate him under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations Enlisted Personnel), paragraph 14-12 for misconduct commission of a serious offense, based on testing positive on a urinalysis at least three times and for receiving two field grade Article 15s for the same offense (abusing marijuana and cocaine). The company commander's recommendation for separation noted...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080016247
On 21 August 1985, the applicant was discharged, in pay grade E-1, under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 14-12c, for misconduct drug abuse, with a general discharge. It appears that the applicant's records were taken into consideration by his chain of command based on his having received a general discharge instead of a discharge under other than honorable conditions, which was normally considered appropriate at the time. He was properly separated for misconduct,...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090016344
THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE: 1. It is clear that the applicant was discharged from the Army under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 14, paragraph 14-12c(2), for misconduct by abusing illegal drugs. In fact, his receipt of a general discharge rather than a discharge under other than honorable conditions may have been his chain of command's way of acknowledging his commendable service in Iraq and as such were more lenient in his discharge processing than...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | AR20110007840
Applicant Name: ????? The intermediate commander reviewed the proposed discharge action and recommended approval of the separation action with a general, under honorable conditions discharge. On 25 May 2010, the separation authority waived further rehabilitative efforts and directed the applicant be discharged with a characterization of service of general, under honorable conditions.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | 20110005828
The applicant requests, in effect, that her: * general discharge under honorable conditions be upgraded to an honorable discharge * that her Reentry Eligibility (RE) code be upgraded from "3" to "1" * that all references to misconduct be removed from her otherwise excellent service record 2. On 19 August 1989, the applicant's unit commander notified her he was initiating action which could result in separation from the Army with a general discharge under honorable conditions under the...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2013 | 20130009456
The applicant's records show he enlisted in the Regular Army on 19 October 1995. On 26 November 1997, the applicant's immediate commander notified him of his intent to initiate separation action against him in accordance with Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations Enlisted Personnel), paragraph 14-12c, for misconduct commission of a serious offense. On 16 December 1997, subsequent to a legal review for legal sufficiency and consistent with the chain of command's recommendation,...