IN THE CASE OF:	  

		BOARD DATE:	  26 January 2012

		DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20110015041 


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 under honorable conditions be upgraded to honorable.

2.  The applicant states he would like the discharge upgrade in order to apply for school and better his life.  He has been to the Butler Veterans Affairs Medical Center rehabilitation program and has been clean and sober since.

3.  The applicant provides no additional 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 16 August 1983.  Upon completion of initial entry training he was awarded military occupational specialty 19D (Cavalry Scout).

3.  A Bar to Reenlistment Certificate, dated 10 September 1984, indicates the applicant was delinquent on his deferred payment plan.  The certificate also indicates he had been late to formation on several occasions and he received punishment for disrespecting a noncommissioned officer.  The certificate further indicates he failed a field urine test for a controlled substance.

4.  A General Counseling Form, dated 15 January 1985, shows he was counseled due to failing five field urine tests and two urine tests conducted at an Army laboratory.

5.  On 19 March 1985, he was notified by his unit commander that separation action was being initiated against him under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations - Enlisted Personnel).  The specific reason for the proposed separation was misconduct, abuse of illegal drugs.

6.  On 21 March 1985, he consulted with legal counsel and acknowledged receipt of the proposed separation action.  He was advised of the basis for the contemplated separation action, the effects of such a separation, the rights available to him, and the effect of any action taken by him in waiving his rights.

7.  He accepted nonjudicial punishment on 24 April 1985 for wrongful use of marijuana.

8.  On 25 April 1985, the separation authority approved the discharge action under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 14, and directed the issuance of a General Discharge Certificate.  The applicant's DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) confirms he was discharged under honorable conditions on 13 May 1985 under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, paragraphs 14-12c and 14-12d, by reason of misconduct – commission of a serious offense – abuse of illegal drugs.

9.  There is no evidence the applicant applied to the Army Discharge Review Board for an upgrade of his discharge.

10.  Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel.  Chapter 14 provides for separation for various types of misconduct, which include 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.

11.  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.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant requests that his discharge be upgraded in order to apply for schools; however, the ABCMR does not upgrade discharges for the sole purpose of enabling an individual to qualify for veterans' educational benefits.

2.  The evidence of record confirms his separation processing was accomplished in compliance with applicable regulations.  All requirements of law and regulation were met and his rights were fully protected throughout the separation process.

3.  His disciplinary history includes a debt delinquency, disrespect to a noncommissioned officer, and acceptance of nonjudicial punishment for wrongful use of marijuana.  This record of indiscipline clearly diminished the overall quality of his service below that meriting a fully honorable discharge.  As a result, his discharge accurately reflects the overall quality of his service and there is an insufficient evidentiary basis to support granting the requested relief.

4.  In view of the foregoing, his request should be denied.

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 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)                                         AR20110015041



3


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20110015041



2


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1