IN THE CASE OF:	  

		BOARD DATE:  22 May 2012

		DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20110022695 


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 upgrade of his general discharge.

2.  The applicant states his drug usage occurred in January 1988 and it was not until October 1988 that he was discharged.  He further states he had been clean since January 1988; therefore, his discharge was unjust.

3.  The applicant provides no additional documents with his 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 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 1 May 1986 for a period of 3 years and training as a petroleum storage specialist.  He completed his basic 


training at Fort Leonard Wood, MO and his advanced individual training at Fort Lee, VA.  He was transferred to Fort Carson, CO for his first and only duty assignment.  He was advanced to the rank/grade of specialist (SPC)/E-4 on
1 May 1987.

3.  On 20 September 1987, the applicant was arrested for 3d degree assault.  He was taken to county jail and booked.  He was later released on an agency bond with a court date of 21 September 1987.

4.  On 30 October 1987, the Fort Carson Family Advocacy Case Management Team (FACMT) determined that a case of spouse physical abuse had been confirmed involving the applicant and recommended the applicant undergo a specific treatment plan.

5.  On 14 December 1987, nonjudicial punishment (NJP) under the provisions of Article 15, Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) was imposed against him for failing to go at the time prescribed to his place of duty.

6.  On 25 February 1988, NJP was imposed against him for wrongfully using cocaine between 27 December 1987 and 26 January 1988.

7.  On 28 September 1988, the applicant’s commander notified him that he was initiating action to separate him from the service under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 14, due to an established pattern of misconduct.  He cited the applicant’s failure to repair, failure to pay his just debts, and wrongful use of cocaine as the basis for his recommendation.

8.  The appropriate authority approved the recommended separation action on
30 September 1988 and directed the applicant be furnished a General Discharge Certificate.

9.  Accordingly, on 20 October 1988, he was discharged under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 14-12b, for misconduct – abuse of illegal drugs.  He completed 2 years, 5 months, and 20 days of creditable active service.

10.  There is no evidence the applicant applied to the Army Discharge Review Board (ADRB) for an upgrade of his discharge within that board’s 15-year statute of limitations.

11.  Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel.  Chapter 14 establishes policy and procedures for separating 


personnel for misconduct.  Specific categories included minor infractions, a pattern of misconduct, involvement in frequent incidents of a discreditable nature with civil and military authorities, and commission of a serious offense.  Although an honorable or general discharge is authorized, a discharge under other than honorable conditions is normally considered appropriate.

12.  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’s administrative separation was accomplished in compliance with applicable regulations with no violations or procedural errors which would have jeopardized his rights.  Accordingly, the type of discharge directed and the reasons therefore were appropriate considering all of the available facts of the case.

2.  The applicant's contentions have been considered.  However, the repeated nature of his misconduct during his period of service indicates an upgrade of his discharge is not warranted.  His service simply does not rise to the level of a fully honorable discharge.

3.  Additionally, although an under other than honorable conditions discharge was normally considered appropriate, he received a general under honorable conditions discharge.  Therefore, it appears his overall record of service was considered during his separation processing.

4.  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

___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)                                         AR20110022695



3


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20110022695



2


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1