ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 1 July 2019 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20170008975 APPLICANT REQUESTS: an upgrade of his general, under honorable condition discharge to honorable. APPLICANT'S SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS CONSIDERED BY THE BOARD: * DD Form 149 (Application for Correction of Military Record) * Letter of Support, Minister X, Senior Minister, Church of Christ * Letter of Support, Mr. X, Vice President US/Caribbean Operations * Certificate of Ordination FACTS: 1. The applicant did not file within the three year time frame provided in Title 10, United States Code (USC), section 1552 (b); however, the Army Board for Correction of Military Records conducted a substantive review of this case and determined it is in the interest of justice to excuse the applicant's failure to timely file. 2. The applicant states he does not claim error or injustice. He was a very young and foolish man that made a few mistakes that have remained with him for life. He is no longer that person. He has been married for over 32 years, has two adult children and 2 grandchildren. He has eight years invested as a business owner. He became an ordained minister some 20 years ago and served as a deacon and shepherd in his regularly attended church for over 26 years. For the past 26 years, his lifestyle change has kept him away from all illegal substances. As he look back, he is proud of the opportunity he had to serve his country and would love to remove the stain of his foolishness and dumb mistakes. He is grateful of the Board’s consideration. 3. The applicant provides letters of support from: a. Minister X rates the applicant’s character and reputation as outstanding. He has known the applicant since 1998. The applicant served very faithfully, sacrificially, and effectively in the full-time and volunteer lay ministries throughout the years. He is well known, respected, and regarded throughout the entire church community. He is a man of integrity, sincerity, and devotion. He eagerly take on additional responsibilities and considers he and his wife as the most devoted and faithful leaders of the entire congregation. As a Veteran and the product of a long list of serving members of the military, I understand and applaud the values and character of the U.S. military. He states the applicant is an excellent representative of someone who has served and is an outstanding reflection of those values and character. b. Mr. X proudly served in the U.S. Army and speaks with a voice of a fellow Soldier and understanding of how special an honorable discharge designation is. He is very comfortable in supporting the applicant’s desire for an upgrade because he has known him for nearly 20 years. They met through common involvement in the church they attended. He served as a minister and the applicant as a lay leader. The applicant shouldered some crucial responsibilities within the church. He had the opportunity to observe the applicant in a variety of situations. He states the applicant has an uncommon wisdom with an accurate insight into the heart and motivation of people. He is a man of his word. He is not a man above any task. Whatever he commits to, he is there. He works with a servant’s heart. He understands the value of not only working with excellence, but being excellent to work with. Over the years, he has come to trust in and appreciate the applicant for who he is, a rare and valuable ally who anyone would be fortunate to work with. 4. The applicant service records shows: a. He enlisted in the Regular Army on 26 August 1980. b. He served in Germany from 21 August 1981 to 2 September 1983. He received credit for a normal tour completion. c. On 26 August 1983, he received nonjudicial punishment under Article 15 for wrongful possession of hashish. His punishment included reduction to private/E-2. d. On 5 January 1984, his battalion commander identified him as a drug user based upon results of a positive urinalysis test. e. On 10 February 1984, he was enrolled in the Alcohol and Drug Abuse Prevention and Control Program (ADAPCP) as a command referral for drug abuse. f. On 16 May 1984, the applicant’s commander determined that further rehabilitation efforts were not practical after the applicant continued to abuse cannabis. He declared him a drug rehabilitation failure. g. On 24 April 1984, the applicant was notified of initiation of separation proceedings under the provisions of Army Regulation (AR) 635-200 (Personnel Separations - Enlisted Personnel), chapter 9 for ADAPCP drug abuse rehabilitation failure, with a characterization of under honorable conditions. h. On 24 May 1984, the applicant acknowledged receipt of the commander's intent to separate him. He consulted with legal counsel who advised him of the basis for the contemplated separation action for misconduct, the type of discharge he could receive and its effect on further enlistment or reenlistment, the possible effects of this discharge, and of the procedures/rights available to him. He elected not to submit a statement in his own behalf. i. Subsequent to this acknowledgement and consultation with counsel, his immediate commander initiated separation action against him for drug abuse rehabilitation failure in accordance with AR 635-200, chapter 9. His chain of command recommended approval. j. The separation authority approved the applicant's discharge under the provisions of AR 635-200, paragraph 9, with his service characterized as under honorable conditions. The applicant was discharged accordingly on 14 June 1984. k. His DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) confirms he was discharged under the provisions of chapter 9 of AR 635-200, for drug abuse - rehabilitation failure, with his service characterized as under honorable conditions. He completed 3 years, 9 months, and 19 days of active service. His DD Form 214 shows he was awarded or authorized: * Army Achievement Medal * Army Service Ribbon * Overseas Service Ribbon * Sharpshooter Marksmanship Qualification Badge with Rifle Bar (M-16) * Expert Marksmanship Qualification Badge with Grenade Bar 4. By regulation, a member who has been referred to the Army Drug and Alcohol Prevention and Control Program (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. 5. In reaching its determination, the Board can consider the applicant’s petition and his service record in accordance with the published equity, injustice, or clemency determination guidance. BOARD DISCUSSION: After review of the application and all evidence, the Board determined relief is not warranted. The applicant’s contentions, letters of support and post-service achievement were carefully considered. The Board applied Department of Defense standards of liberal consideration to the complete evidentiary record and did not find any evidence of error, injustice, or inequity. He was appropriately discharged for failing a substance abuse rehabilitation program, and was provided an under honorable conditions (General) characterization of service. The Board agreed that the applicant's discharge characterization is warranted as he did not meet the standards of acceptable conduct and performance of duty for Army personnel. BOARD VOTE: Mbr 1 Mbr 2 Mbr 3 : : : 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 the overall merits of this case are insufficient as a basis for correction of the records of the individual concerned. 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. REFERENCES: 1. Title 10, USC, section 1552(b), provides that applications for correction of military records must be filed within three 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 three-year statute of limitations if the ABCMR determines it would be in the interest of justice to do so. 2. Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations - Enlisted Personnel), sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel. a. Paragraph 3-7a states 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 states 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 Army Drug and Alcohol Prevention and Control Program (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. Nothing in this chapter prevents separation of a Soldier who has been referred to such a program under any other provisions of this regulation. 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. However, an honorable discharge is required if restricted-use information was used. 3. On 25 July 2018, the Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness issued guidance to Military Discharge Review Boards and Boards for Correction of Military/Naval Records (BCM/NRs) regarding equity, injustice, or clemency determinations. Clemency generally refers to relief specifically granted from a criminal sentence. BCM/NRs may grant clemency regardless of the type of court-martial. However, the guidance applies to more than clemency from a sentencing in a court-martial; it also applies to other corrections, including changes in a discharge, which may be warranted based on equity or relief from injustice. This guidance does not mandate relief, but rather provides standards and principles to guide Boards in application of their equitable relief authority. In determining whether to grant relief based on equity, injustice, or clemency grounds, BCM/NRs shall consider the prospect for rehabilitation, external evidence, sworn testimony, policy changes, relative severity of misconduct, mental and behavioral health conditions, official governmental acknowledgement that a relevant error or injustice was committed, and uniformity of punishment. Changes to the narrative reason for discharge and/or an upgraded character of service granted solely on equity, injustice, or clemency grounds normally should not result in separation pay, retroactive promotions, and payment of past medical expenses or similar benefits that might have been received if the original discharge had been for the revised reason or had the upgraded service characterization. //NOTHING FOLLOWS// ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20170008975 6 1