IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 5 January 2016 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20150005912 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 that his general, under honorable conditions discharge be upgraded to honorable. 2. The applicant states he is trying to start his career in law enforcement as an Atlanta police officer; however, the characterization of his discharge from the U.S. Army is hindering this opportunity. Because second chances are possible in this great country, he is asking for an upgrade of his discharge so he will be able to pursue his dream of a career in law enforcement. 3. The applicant provides no additional 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. On 24 September 1996, the applicant enlisted in the Regular Army beginning in the rank of private, pay grade E-2. He completed his initial training as an ammunition specialist. 3. Records indicate that the applicant was reduced to private, pay grade E-1 on 30 July 1997. There is no documentation in the available records concerning the circumstances surrounding his reduction. 4. Records show the applicant was advanced to private, pay grade E-2 on 24 January 1998. 5. A memorandum for the commander, dated 27 February 1998, stated the applicant had been apprehended by civilian police for driving while intoxicated (DWI). His blood alcohol level was reported as 0.133. 6. On 24 November 1998, he was advanced to private first class, pay grade E-3. 7. On 5 January 1999, the applicant accepted nonjudicial punishment (NJP) for the wrongful use of marijuana. 8. The applicant’s commander notified the applicant of his intent to recommend his separation from the service under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations), Chapter 14, for misconduct due to his DWI and NJP for using marijuana. On 11 February 1999, the applicant acknowledged receipt of the commander’s notification. 9. The applicant consulted with counsel concerning his rights and requested consideration of his case by an administrative separation board if the commander recommended an under other than honorable characterization of service. Otherwise, he waived such board consideration. He elected not to submit a statement in his own behalf. 10. On or about 24 February 1999, the applicant’s commander recommended separation from the service under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, Chapter 14, for the reasons discussed above. 11. On 12 March 1999, the appropriate authority approved the recommendation for discharge and directed that the applicant be issued a general under honorable conditions characterization of service. 12. Accordingly, on 5 April 1999, the applicant was discharged. He completed 2 years, 6 months, and 12 days of net active duty service. 13. 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. 12. Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations - Enlisted Personnel) 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 a pattern of misconduct and commission of a serious offense. Action will be taken to separate a member for misconduct when it is clearly established that rehabilitation is impracticable or is unlikely to succeed. 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 (emphasis added), or is otherwise so meritorious that any other characterization would be clearly inappropriate. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS: 1. The applicant contends that his general under honorable conditions characterization of service should be upgraded to honorable so that he will be eligible to start a career in law enforcement. 2. The applicant’s administrative separation was accomplished in compliance with applicable regulations with no indication of procedural errors which would tend to jeopardize his rights. 3. The type of discharge directed and the reasons therefore were appropriate considering all of the facts of the case. 4. In order to justify correction of a military record the applicant must show to the satisfaction of the Board, or it must otherwise satisfactorily appear, that the record is in error or unjust. The applicant has failed to submit evidence that would satisfy this requirement. 6. The applicant’s desire for a career in law enforcement is not a sufficiently mitigating factor to justify an upgrade of the characterization of his service. 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) AR20110020309 3 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 1 ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20150005912 4 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 1