IN THE CASE OF:	  

		BOARD DATE:	  27 July 2011

		DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20100028206 


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 that his general discharge (GD) be upgraded to an honorable discharge (HD).

2.  The applicant states he has changed his life for the better.  He received a prior HD and three Army Commendation Medals that shows his otherwise outstanding service.

3.  The applicant provides no supporting evidence.

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.  The applicant enlisted in the Regular Army on 28 November 1979, completed training, and was awarded military occupational specialty 91E (Dental Specialist).
3.  He was honorably discharged on 7 November 1983 and again on 21 August 1986 with an immediate reenlistments on both occasions.  

4.  The applicant  was promoted to sergeant effective 1 November 1985.

5.  On 17 March 1988, the applicant received nonjudicial punishment (NJP) under Article 15, Uniform Code of Military Justice, for failure to go to his appointed place of duty at the prescribed time and with intent to deceive signed an official roster with a reporting time earlier than actual attendance.

6.  On 21 March 1988, the applicant provided a statement to an investigator stating he had attempted to self refer himself to the Alcohol and Drug Abuse Prevention and Control Program (ADAPCP) but the clinic was closed.  He admitted to having used marijuana after duty hours on 17 March 1988 and stated he had previously attended ADAPCP.

7.  A drug urinalysis provided by the applicant on 21 March 1988 tested positive for marijuana and cocaine.

8.  On 22 March 1988, the applicant was counseled for failure to go to his appointed place of duty the previous day.  The assigned duty was to report to the dental clinic to provide a urine sample for drug testing.

9.  On 20 May 1988, the applicant received NJP for use of marijuana and cocaine.

10.  On 31 May 1988, his command initiated separation proceedings under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 14-12c, for misconduct - drug abuse.

11.  On 15 June 1988, the discharge authority approved the discharge under Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 14-12c, for misconduct - drug abuse, and directed the applicant receive an under honorable conditions discharge.

12.  He was discharged on 24 June 1988 with a GD.  His DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) shows he had 8 years, 6 months, and 27 days of creditable service with no lost time.  It lists his awards as the Army Service Ribbon, Army Good Conduct Medal (2nd award), Noncommissioned Officers Professional Development Ribbon with Numeral 1, Expert Marksmanship Qualification Badge with Rifle Bar, and the Sharpshooter Marksmanship Qualification Badge with Hand Grenade Bar.

13.  The available record does not contain any indication of any award of any Army Commendation Medals.

14.  There is no indication the applicant applied to the Army Discharge Review Board within its 15-year statutory limit for review.

15.  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.  At the time, first-time drug offenders in the grade of sergeant and above, and all Soldiers with three years or more of total military service, active and reserve, will be processed for separation upon discovery of a drug offense.  All Soldiers must be processed for separation after a second offense.  Specifically paragraph 14-12c is to be used for misconduct - drug abuse.  A discharge under other than honorable conditions (UOTHC) is normally considered appropriate.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant states he has changed his life for the better.  He received a prior HD and three Army Commendation Medals that shows his otherwise outstanding service.

2.  The applicant did have two prior honorable discharges.  His command appears to have taken this into consideration when it afforded him the GD in lieu of the normal issuance of a UOTHC discharge.  

3.  There is neither any available evidence to substantiate the applicant's contention that he was awarded three Army Commendation Medals nor any basis for concluding that this would warrant upgrading the discharge.

4.  The discharge proceedings were conducted in accordance with law and regulations applicable at the time.  The character of the discharge is commensurate with the applicant's overall record of military service.

5.  The applicant has not provided any documentation to show that he has changed his life or that any life style change outweighs his illegal use of marijuana and cocaine while on active duty.  Therefore, relief is not warranted.




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)                                         AR20100028206



3


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20100028206



2


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1