IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 3 November 2015 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20150003040 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 under other than honorable conditions (UOTHC) discharge. 2. The applicant states he is not eligible for benefits or assistance from veteran services. His discharge should be upgraded because it was based on information that was received from a non-military person (spouse) who was emotionally hurt and used every tactic to keep him under duress. This resulted in him turning to different measures to relieve stress. 3. The applicant provides no additional evidence. 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 the cases 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. 2. The applicant's military records show he enlisted in the Regular Army (RA) on 15 October 1991. 3. He reenlisted in the RA on 15 September 1993 and was promoted to pay grade E-4 on the same day. 4. He served in Germany from 3 January 1994 through 11 January 1997. 5. On 31 July 1996, he accepted nonjudicial punishment (NJP) under Article 15, Uniform Code of Military Justice, for wrongfully using a controlled substance between 8 June and 8 July 1996. His punishment included a pay grade reduction, a forfeiture of $650.00 pay for 2 months, and 45 days of restriction and extra duty. He elected to appeal and his appeal was denied on 15 August 1996. 6. He again reenlisted in the RA on 27 November 1996. 7. His record is void of the complete facts and circumstances surrounding his discharge; however, his record contains a DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) showing he was discharged in pay grade E-1 on 12 January 1997, under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations – Enlisted Personnel ), paragraph 14-12c(2), for misconduct. He was credited with completing 5 years, 2 months, and 28 days of active service. His service was characterized as UOTHC. 8. Item 18 (Remarks) of his DD Form 214 contains the entry, "Continuous honorable active service from 1991015 until 19930915." 9. There is no evidence the applicant applied to the Army Discharge Review Board within its 15-year statute of limitations for an upgrade of his discharge. 10. Army Regulation 635-200, in effect at the time, set forth the basic authority for separation of enlisted personnel. The regulation stated in: a. Paragraph 14-12c - First time drug offenders in the grade of sergeant and below may be processed for separation for the commission of a serious offense such as the abuse of illegal drugs. In the grade of sergeant and above and all Soldiers in with 3 years or more of total military service Active and Reserve will be processed for separation upon discovery of a drug offense. The issuance of a discharge UOTHC was normally considered appropriate. The separation authority could direct a general discharge if such a discharge was merited by the Soldier's overall records. b. Paragraph 14-12c(2) (Abuse of Illegal Drugs) – abuse of illegal drugs was serious misconduct. The immediate and intermediate commanders would recommend separation or retention. Recommendations would be made as to characterization of service. c. Paragraph 3-7a – an honorable discharge was a separation with honor. The honorable characterization was appropriate when the quality of the member’s service generally had met the standards of acceptance conduct and performance of duty for Army personnel or was otherwise so meritorious that any other characterization would be inappropriate. d. Paragraph 3-7b – a general discharge was a separation from the Army under honorable condition. When authorized, it was issued to a Soldier whose military record was satisfactory but not sufficiently meritorious to warrant an honorable discharge. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS: 1. The applicant's record is void of the complete facts and circumstances surrounding his 1997 discharge. The available evidence shows he accepted NJP for wrongfully using a controlled substance and he was subsequently discharged under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph  14-12c(2). 2. Paragraph 14-12c(2) of Army Regulation 635-200 allowed for the command directed discharge of Soldiers for misconduct as the result of the use of illegal drugs. 3. Notwithstanding his contentions, it appears his administrative discharge was accomplished in compliance with applicable law and regulation in effect at the time with no indication of procedural error which would have jeopardized his rights. His military records contain no evidence which would entitle him to an upgrade of his UOTHC discharge. 4. Without evidence to the contrary, it appears the characterization of his discharge was commensurate with the reason for discharge in accordance with the governing regulation in effect at the time. 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) AR20150003040 3 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 1 ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20150003040 4 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 1