IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 19 October 2010 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20100012389 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, the spouse of a deceased former service member (FSM), request correction of the FSM's DD Form 214 to remove his narrative reason for separation or that the narrative reason for separation be removed from the "deleted copy" of his DD Form 214. 2. The applicant states: * the narrative reason for the FSM's separation adversely affects her children and herself * they are upstanding citizens seeking careers in the medical field * because the FSM's narrative reason for separation is displayed on the front of his DD Form 214, she had serious concerns that it could cause denial of benefits/opportunities for their children and herself in the future * she requested a deleted copy of the FSM's DD Form 214 and the narrative reason was displayed on the "deleted" copy as well 3. The applicant provides: * the FSM's Certificate of Death dated 8 September 2009 * her Marriage License * a letter from the National Personnel Records Center dated 23 November 2009 * the FSM's DD Form 214 * the FSM's DD Form 215 (Correction to DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) * information pertaining to FSM's funeral services CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE: 1. The FSM enlisted in the Regular Army for 3 years on 27 November 1985. He successfully completed training as a multichannel communications systems operator. He reenlisted for 4 years on 25 May 1988. 2. On 27 April 1989, nonjudicial punishment was imposed against the FSM for wrongfully using cocaine, a controlled substance. 3. On 16 May 1989, the FSM was counseled for having a positive urinalysis test that was conducted in January 1989. He was told that this was the second such offense since his entry into the military and that separation paperwork must be initiated under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 14. 4. The FSM was notified that he was being recommended for discharge under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 14-12c(2), for misconduct. He acknowledged receipt notification and, after consulting with counsel, he elected not to submit a statement in his own behalf. 5. The appropriate authority approved the recommendation on 21 September 1989 and he directed the issuance of a General Discharge Certificate. Accordingly, on 6 October 1989, the FSM was discharged under the provisions Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 14-12c(2), for drug abuse. 6. The narrative reason for discharge on the FSM's DD Form 214 is shown as "Misconduct – Drug Abuse." 7. A review of the available records does not reveal a "deleted" copy of the FSM's DD Form 214. 8. Further review of the FSM's records does not show the FSM ever applied to the Army Discharge Review Board for a change of his narrative reason for separation within that board's 15-year statute of limitations. 9. Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel. Chapter 14 establishes policy and prescribes procedures for separating members for misconduct. Specific categories include minor disciplinary infractions, a pattern of misconduct, commission of a serious offense, and convictions by civil authorities. Paragraph 14-12c(2) states, "Abuse of illegal drugs is serious misconduct." 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. 10. Army Regulation 635-5 (Separation Documents) serves as the authority for the preparation of the DD Form 214. It provides, in pertinent part, that the DD Form 214 will be prepared to reflect an individual's service, as it exists on the date of release from active duty (REFRAD) or discharge. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS: 1. The applicant's contentions have been considered. However, they are not sufficiently mitigating to warrant the requested relief. 2. A DD Form 214 is prepared to reflect an individual's service as it exists on the date of REFRAD or discharge. The FSM was discharged for misconduct due to drug abuse. This information is properly reflected on his DD Form 214 as the narrative reason for his discharge. 3. The FSM's records do not contain a "deleted" copy of his DD Form 214 and the fact that one is not contained therein is not a basis for removing the narrative reason for separation from his DD Form 214. 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) AR20100012389 3 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 1 ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20100012389 4 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 1