IN THE CASE OF:
BOARD DATE: 12 December 2013
DOCKET NUMBER: AR20130007462
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 an upgrade of his under other than honorable conditions (UOTHC) discharge to an honorable discharge.
2. The applicant states, in effect, the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) recently decided his service was honorable for VA purposes. He requests final documentation showing his service was honorable.
3. The applicant provides copies of:
* a DD Form 293 (Application for the Review of Discharge from the Armed Forces of the United States), dated 1 April 2013
* VA letter, dated 18 March 2013
CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:
1. The applicant enlisted in the Regular Army on 2 March 1987. He held military occupational specialty (MOS) 31K (Combat Signaler).
2. The available record shows the applicant:
a. accepted nonjudicial punishment (NJP) under the provisions of Article 15, Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) on 26 May 1988 for the wrongful use of marijuana.
b. was convicted in accordance with his plea by a December 1988 summary court-martial of the wrongful use of marijuana.
3. On 6 January 1989, the applicant's commander notified him that he was initiating action to separate him under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations Enlisted Personnel), chapter 14, paragraph
14-12c(2)(b), for abuse of illegal drugs. The reason for his proposed action was the applicant's conviction by a summary court-martial for the wrongful use of marijuana and his acceptance of an NJP for the wrongful use of marijuana. The applicant was advised of his rights and of the separation procedures involved.
4. He was advised by counsel of the basis for the contemplated separation action and its effects; of the rights available to him; and the effect of any action taken by him in waiving his rights. He waived his right to an administrative separation board and he indicated he would not submit a statement in his own behalf.
5. On 6 January 1989, the applicant's commander recommended separation with a UOTHC discharge under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 14-12c(2)(b).
6. On 27 February 1989, the separation authority approved the chain of command's recommendation for discharge with a UOTHC discharge.
7. On 7 April 1989, the applicant was discharged accordingly. He had completed 2 years and 13 days of creditable active service.
8. There is no available evidence showing he applied to the Army Discharge Review Board for an upgrade of his discharge.
9. He provides a copy of a letter in which the VA indicates they have decided that his U.S. Army service from 2 March 1987 to 7 April 1989 is honorable for VA purposes. He is entitled to health care benefits for any disability determined to be incurred or aggravated during active Army service.
10. Army Regulation 635-200, in effect at the time, sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel:
a. Chapter 14 establishes policy and prescribes procedures for separating members for misconduct. Specific categories include minor disciplinary infractions, frequent incidents of a discreditable nature with civil or military authorities, a pattern of misconduct, commission of a serious offense, conviction by civil authorities, desertion, and absence without leave. A UOTHC discharge is normally appropriate for a Soldier discharged under this chapter.
b. 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.
c. Paragraph 3-7b states a general discharge is a separation from the Army under honorable conditions. When authorized, it is issued to a Soldier whose military record is satisfactory but not sufficiently meritorious to warrant an honorable discharge.
DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:
1. The applicant requests an upgrade of his UOTHC discharge to an honorable discharge based on the fact that the VA had decided his service from 2 March 1987 to 7 April 1989 was honorable for VA purposes.
2. The evidence of record shows the applicant's administrative separation was accomplished in compliance with applicable regulations with no indication of procedural errors which would have jeopardized his rights.
3. The fact that the VA, in its discretion, decided the applicant's active duty service was honorable for VA purposes is a prerogative exercised within the policies of that agency. It does not, in itself, establish his active duty service as honorable for Department of the Army purposes.
4. In view of the foregoing, there is an insufficient evidentiary basis for granting the applicant's requested relief.
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) AR20130007182
2
ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
1
ARMY | BCMR | CY2012 | 20120013106
The applicants military record shows he enlisted in the DEP on 12 March 1985. On 17 November 1988, the applicants company commander initiated action to separate the applicant under the provisions of Army Regulations 635-200 (Personnel Separations Enlisted Separations), chapter 14, for commission of a serious offense. The separation authority approved his discharge and he was discharged on 8 February 1989, under the provision of Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 14-12c, for Misconduct...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090014555
On 27 April 1989, the applicant's commander notified him that action was being initiated to separate him under the provisions of paragraph 14-12c of Army Regulation 635-200 (Active Duty Enlisted Administrative Separations) for misconduct - abuse of illegal drugs. The commander advised the applicant of his right to consult with counsel, his right to obtain copies of documents that would be sent to the separation authority supporting the proposed separation action, to request a hearing before...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2012 | 20120007142
The applicant requests, in effect, correction of his time in service to show he completed 2 years of net active service and/or an upgrade of his general discharge. On 20 January 1989, the applicant's company commander notified the applicant that action was being initiated to separate him from the service under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel SeparationsEnlisted Separation), paragraph 14-12b for pattern of misconduct with a general discharge. There is no evidence he...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2012 | 20120004678
On 8 November 1989, her immediate commander notified her of his intent to initiate separation action against her in accordance with chapter 14-12c (Commission of a Serious Offense-Abuse of Illegal Drugs) of Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations-Enlisted Personnel), for two periods of AWOL and wrongful use of cocaine. On 17 November 1989, the separation authority approved her discharge action under the provisions of chapter 14-12c of Army Regulation 635-200 and directed she be...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2013 | 20130002618
The applicant requests correction of his DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) to change his narrative reason of separation, "Misconduct Abuse of Illegal Drugs," to "something more accurate." Army Regulation 635-5-1 (Separation Program Designator Codes), in effect at the time, stated that SPD code "JKH" (Misconduct Commission of a Serious Offense) was the proper SPD code for separations under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 14-12c. As a...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2012 | 20120022594
Application for correction of military records (with supporting documents provided, if any). The applicant requests an upgrade of his under other than honorable conditions (UOTHC) discharge. On 11 January 1989, the applicants commander informed him of his intent to separate him under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations - Enlisted Personnel), paragraph 14-12b, for patterns of misconduct.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2001 | 2001063521C070421
The applicant was discharged with a general discharge on 19 June 1989 for misconduct – commission of a serious offense. On 17 March 1994 the Army Discharge Review Board denied the applicant’s request to upgrade his discharge, but did direct that the reason for his discharge be changed to “misconduct.” On 14 August 2001 the VA granted the applicant a 10 percent service connected disability rating for intermittent right chest wall pain, effective 6 October 2000.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090004240
The applicant requests that his general discharge be upgraded to an honorable discharge. On 22 September 1989, the applicant was discharged from active duty, in pay grade E-3, under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 14-12c, for misconduct-abuse of illegal drugs. There is no evidence that the applicant applied to the Army Discharge Review Board (ADRB) for an upgrade of his discharge within its 15-year statute of limitations.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2013 | 20130001310
The applicant requests an upgrade of his under other than honorable conditions discharge to a general, under honorable conditions discharge. The applicant states he was told after 6 months his discharge would be upgraded to a general, under honorable conditions discharge but it never was. 13 On 15 October 1990, the separation authority approved his discharge under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 14-12c, for misconduct - commission of a serious offense, with an under...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2006 | 20060012918
Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 3-7a, it states that an honorable discharge is a separation with honor. The evidence of record shows the applicant tested positive for cocaine and was punishment under Article 15, UCMJ for this offense, and for being AWOL for 7 days. After review of the evidence of this case, it is determined that the applicant has not presented sufficient evidence which warrants changing his UOTHC discharge to a general under honorable conditions discharge or to an...