BOARD DATE: 1 August 2013 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20130000901 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 general discharge under honorable conditions. 2. The applicant states we were all young at one time in our lives and have made mistakes. He knows he made a mistake, but is requesting an upgrade of his general discharge. 3. The applicant provides a copy of his DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharged from Active Duty). 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 14 July 1982, completed training, and was awarded military occupational specialty 11H (Heavy Anti-Armor Weapons Infantryman). 3. On 5 May 1983, the applicant was awarded the Army Achievement Medal for meritorious achievement during the period 18-22 April 1983. 4. The applicant received nonjudicial punishment under Article 15, Uniform Code of Military Justice, as follows: a. on 25 October 1983, for possession of marijuana; and b. on 20 July 1984, for illegal drug use (marijuana). 5. On 23 July 1984, the applicant's command imposed a bar to promotion/ advancement to private/E-2. 6. The documentation related to his separation processing is not included in the available records. 7. On 21 September 1984, the applicant was discharged under honorable conditions for misconduct (pattern of misconduct) under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations – Enlisted Personnel), chapter 14. He completed 2 years, 2 months, and 8 days of creditable service with no lost time. 8. Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel. a. An honorable discharge is a separation with honor. The honorable characterization is appropriate when the quality of the Soldier's service generally has met the standards of acceptable conduct and performance of duty. b. A general discharge is a separation under honorable conditions issued to a Soldier whose military record was satisfactory but not so meritorious as to warrant an honorable discharge. c. Chapter 14 establishes policy and prescribes procedures for separating members for misconduct. Specific categories include minor disciplinary infractions, a pattern of misconduct, commission of serious offense, conviction by civil authorities, desertion, or absences 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. A discharge under other than honorable conditions is normally considered appropriate. 9. Army Regulation 15-185 (Army Board for Correction of Military Records) prescribes the policies and procedures for correction of military records by the Secretary of the Army acting through the Army Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR). Paragraph 2-9 states the ABCMR begins consideration of each case with the presumption of administrative regularity. The applicant has the burden of proving an error or injustice by a preponderance of the evidence. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS: 1. In the absence of evidence to the contrary, it is presumed that the discharge proceedings were conducted in accordance with law and regulations applicable at the time. The type of discharge directed and the reasons therefor were appropriate considering all the facts of the case. 2. The applicant's contention that he was young and immature at the time is not sufficiently mitigating to warrant relief. The applicant had satisfactorily completed training and was awarded a personal decoration prior to his drug charges. His prior satisfactory performance demonstrates his capacity to serve and indicates he was neither too young nor immature. 3. Neither the mere passage of time nor normal good citizenship in and of itself is sufficiently mitigating to warrant an upgrade of his discharge. 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) AR20130000901 3 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 1 ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20130000901 2 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 1