BOARD DATE:	  20 July 2010

		DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20090021344 


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 her general discharge be upgraded to an honorable discharge.

2.  The applicant states it's been over 20 years since her discharge, she was young and stupid, she had no help or guidance from her peers, she has matured since her discharge, and she no longer acts like or does the things she did 20 years ago.

3.  The applicant adds that she served 3 years in Iraq as a logistics contractor and would like to continue serving in Iraq.  She contends that upgrading her discharge would assist her in remaining in Iraq as a contractor.

4.  The applicant does not provide any additional documents.

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's military records show that she enlisted in the Regular Army on 8 January 1985 and was awarded the military occupational specialty of subsistence supply specialist.

3.  The applicant accepted nonjudicial punishment (NJP) under the provisions of Article 15, Uniform Code of Military Justice, on three occasions for failure to go at the time prescribed to her appointed place of duty (four specifications), disobeying a lawful order, and wrongfully using marijuana.

4.  On 13 February 1986, the applicant's commander notified her of her intent to recommend her discharge due to misconduct and of her rights in conjunction with that recommendation.

5.  After receiving the applicant's response to her notification, the applicant's commander forwarded her recommendation to discharge the applicant.  That recommendation was approved by the appropriate authority.  Accordingly, on 7 April 1986 the applicant was given a general discharge under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200 (Enlisted Separations), chapter 14, due to misconduct. 
The applicant was 20 years old at that time.

6.  Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel.  Paragraph 14-12b applies to the separation of individuals who committed a pattern of misconduct which includes conduct prejudicial to good order and discipline and discreditable involvement with civil or military authorities.

7.  Army Regulation 635-200, 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.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant accepted NJP on three occasions for five offenses, which included wrongfully using marijuana.  Such repeated misconduct certainly warranted separation.

2.  The applicant was 20 years old when she was discharged.  Soldiers that age and younger routinely complete their enlistments without incidents of misconduct.

3.  While it is commendable that the applicant has changed her behavior and is working to support the military in Iraq, these matters of mitigation are insufficient to warrant upgrading a properly-issued discharge.

4.  In view of the foregoing, there is no basis for granting the applicant's request.

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)                                         AR20090021344



3


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20090021344



2


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1