IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 2 January 2014 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20130007841 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. 2. The applicant states he is seeking veteran's benefits and would like to be afforded a change of the character of his service. 3. The applicant provides no supporting documentation. 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 19 February 1991. He was advanced to pay grade E-4 in April 1993 and reenlisted on 28 September 1993. 3. The applicant received nonjudicial punishment (NJP) under Article 15, Uniform Code of Military Justice on 23 May 1996 for illegal use of cocaine. 4. On 23 June 1996 his command initiated separation proceedings under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 14-12(c), misconduct - illegal use of drugs. 5. The applicant acknowledged the separation action and that a separation under general conditions could result in substantial prejudice in civilian life. He waived his rights to representation by counsel and to submit a statement on his own behalf. 6. The discharge authority approved the separation and directed the applicant be discharged with a GD. 7. The applicant was discharged on 20 August 1996 with a GD. He had 5 years, 6 months, and 2 days of creditable service with no lost time. 8. There is no indication the applicant applied to the Army Discharge Review Board within its 15-year statutory limit for review. 9. Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel. It provides the following: a. Paragraph 3-7a states an honorable discharge (HD) is a separation with honor. The honorable characterization of service is appropriate when the quality of the Soldier’s service generally has met the standards of acceptable conduct and performance of duty. b. Paragraph 3-7b states a general discharge (GD) 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. Paragraph 14-12(c), deals with separation for drug abuse, and states that individuals identified as drug abusers may be separated prior to their normal expiration of term of service. The regulation in effect at the time stated individuals in pay grades E-5 and above would be processed for separation upon discovery of a drug offense. Those in pay grades below E-5 could also be processed after a first drug offense and must have been processed for separation after a second offense. The issuance of a discharge under other than honorable conditions was normally considered appropriate. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS: 1. Entitlement to veterans benefits is not within the preview of this Board nor is it normally considered a basis for granting relief. 2. The applicant has submitted neither probative evidence nor any argument in support of his request. 3. The applicant's administrative separation was accomplished in compliance with applicable regulations. The type of discharge directed and the reasons therefore were appropriate considering all the facts of the case. 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) AR20130007841 3 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 1 ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20130007841 2 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 1