BOARD DATE: 8 June 2017 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20160001011 BOARD VOTE: ________ ________ ________ GRANT FULL RELIEF ________ ________ ________ GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF ________ ________ ________ GRANT FORMAL HEARING __x______ __x______ __x___ DENY APPLICATION 2 Enclosures 1. Board Determination/Recommendation 2. Evidence and Consideration BOARD DATE: 8 June 2017 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20160001011 BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION: The evidence presented does not demonstrate the existence of a probable error or injustice. Therefore, the Board determined 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. BOARD DATE: 8 June 2017 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20160001011 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, in effect, correction of his DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) to show some other, more favorable narrative reason for separation. 2. The applicant states he was discharged as a drug abuse rehabilitation failure; however, he did not use drugs. His company commander and first sergeant were fixated on not letting him leave the Army on honorable terms because he would not become a unit snitch. They ruined his reenlistment chances by telling other Soldiers in the unit bad things about him. The first sergeant went into a barracks room and caught another Soldier smoking marijuana; however, the first sergeant and the Soldier lied and said he was the one smoking. 3. The applicant provides a copy of his DD Form 214 for the period ending 29 July 1983. 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 30 July 1980. He entered active duty, completed his initial entry training, and was awarded military occupational specialty (MOS) 91B (Medical Specialist). 3. It appears the applicant was enrolled in the Alcohol and Drug Abuse Prevention Control Program (ADAPCP) on some unknown date. On 17 May 1983, the Alcohol and Drug Control Officer (ADCO) informed the applicant's commander that he was declared a rehabilitation failure. 4. On 8 June 1983, the applicant was recommended for discharge in accordance with Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations – Enlisted Personnel), chapter 9 (exemption policy). His record shows he received three nonjudicial punishments under the provision of Article 15 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ), with one being for the wrongful possession of marijuana on or about 4 April 1983. 5. On 29 June 1983, the applicant received a letter of notification for discharge for alcohol or other drug abuse. He acknowledge the notification with his signature. 6. On 30 June 1983, the applicant's commander forwarded the recommendation for discharge to the approval authority stating the following: a. On 14 March 1983, a military police report stated that the applicant attempted to hide marijuana when apprehended. b. He was enrolled in the ADAPCP. He successfully completed a Track I program and was released from the program on 25 April 1983. However, he had three positive urinalysis tests for tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) on 1, 8, and 14 April 1983. c. On 4 April 1983, he gave the applicant nonjudicial punishment under the provisions of Article 15, UCMJ, for possession of marijuana. During his preliminary investigation and imposition of punishment, the commander explained that the applicant was obligated to cease his use of marijuana. The commander also told him that a positive urinalysis would lead to elimination proceedings under chapter 9, Army Regulation 635-200. 7. The separation approval authority approved the chapter 9 separation and directed issuance of a discharge under honorable conditions (general) on 21 July 1983. 8. The applicant was discharged from the Army on 29 July 1983. The DD Form 214 he was issued confirms he was discharged under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 9, and his character of service was under honorable conditions (general). His DD Form 214 further shows his narrative reason for separation was "drug abuse rehabilitation failure." 9. The applicant applied to the Army Discharge Review Board (ADRB) for an upgrade of his discharge within that board’s 15-year statute of limitations. He was granted an upgrade of his general discharge to honorable by the ADRB on 5 March 1985. He received a new DD Form 214, which shows his character of service as honorable; however, his narrative reason for discharge remained drug abuse rehabilitation failure. REFERENCES: 1. Army Regulation 635-5 (Separation Documents) prescribes the separation documents prepared for Soldiers upon retirement, discharge, or release from active military service or control of the Army. Chapter 2 contains guidance for preparation of the DD Form 214. Paragraph 2-7a provides that an entry is required in all items on the DD Form 214. When no entry is appropriate, enter the abbreviation for not applicable, "NA." Table 2-1 instructs the preparer to enter the reason for separation in block 28 (Narrative Reason for Separation) based on the relevant regulatory or statutory authority. 2. Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel. a. 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. b. Paragraph 3-7b provides that a general discharge is a separation from the Army under honorable conditions. When authorized, it is issued to a Soldier whose military record is satisfactory but not sufficiently meritorious to warrant an honorable discharge. c. Chapter 9 contains the authority and outlines the procedures for discharging Soldiers because of alcohol or other drug abuse. A member who has been referred to the ADAPCP for alcohol/drug abuse may be separated because of inability or refusal to participate in, cooperate in, or successfully complete such a program if there is a lack of potential for continued Army service and rehabilitation efforts are no longer practical. Initiation of separation proceedings is required for Soldiers designated as alcohol/drug rehabilitation failures. The service of Soldiers discharged under this chapter will be characterized as honorable or general under honorable conditions unless the Soldier is in entry-level status and an uncharacterized description of service is required. DISCUSSION: 1. The applicant's request for correction of his DD Form 214 to show some other, more favorable narrative reason for separation was carefully considered. He contends he did not use drugs. 2. The applicant's record shows he received nonjudicial punishment for drug and alcohol related misconduct. However, he was allowed to continue to serve and receive rehabilitative assistance from the ADAPCP. While in the ADAPCP, he failed three urinalysis tests and was declared a rehabilitation failure. 3. Following his rehabilitation failure under the ADAPCP, his commander initiated separation proceedings. The separation proceedings were approved, his discharge was ordered, and he received a general discharge under honorable conditions that was later upgraded to honorable by the ADRB. 4. The applicant was discharged under the provisions of chapter 9, Army Regulation 635-200, by reason of alcohol or other drug abuse (exemption policy). Absent the rehabilitation failure, his chain of command did not reflect any additional reason(s) to separate him. There is no more appropriate regulatory reason for separation aside from the one he was given. //NOTHING FOLLOWS// ABCMR Record of Proceedings AR20150000953 Enclosure 1 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20150016310 2 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Enclosure 1 ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20160001011 4 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Enclosure 2