IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 10 October 2013 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20130003865 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 discharge. 2. The applicant states: * he was wrong for using disrespectful language toward a noncommissioned officer (NCO) and not being at his appointed place of duty * his daughter was sick and he went to see about her * he does not recall the marijuana charge, but does recall his hashish charge * if he could turn back the hands of time these things would not have happened, but he was young and stupid 3. The applicant provided: * his DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) * three DA Forms 2627 (Record of Proceedings Under Article 15, Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ)) 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 25 January 1971 at the age of 18 years, 5 months, and 28 days. 3. He submitted and his record contains three DA Forms 2627, which show he accepted nonjudicial punishment (NJP) under the provisions of Article 15 on: * 15 February 1972 for being disrespectful in language to an NCO * 11 August 1972 for being absent without leave (AWOL) from 5 August to 9 August 1972 * 8 December 1972 for having in his possession marijuana and hashish 4. The DD Form 214 shows he was discharged on 28 January 1974 under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations - Enlisted Personnel), chapter 2, for completion of his required active duty service with an under honorable conditions (general) discharge. The DD Form 214 he was issued confirms he completed a total of 3 years of active service and had 4 days of time lost. 5. There is no indication that the applicant applied to the Army Discharge Review Board for an upgrade of his discharge within its 15-year statute of limitations. 6. He submitted a note from the Oklahoma Public Employees Retirement System which explained the eligibility requirements for his retirement. 7. Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel, 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 (emphasis added) or is otherwise so meritorious that any other characterization would be clearly inappropriate. 8. Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 3-7b, provides that 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. His service record shows he received three Article 15’s. The evidence of record shows a total of 4 days of lost time. As a result, his record of service did not meet the standards of acceptable conduct and performance of duty for Army personnel to receive an honorable discharge. 2. There is no evidence that indicates his sick daughter contributed to his acts of misbehavior or misconduct. In fact, he was given his first NJP for using disrespectful language to an NCO 6 months prior to his AWOL. 3. In view of the above, there is no basis for granting him 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) AR20130003865 3 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 1 ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20130003865 3 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 1