MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:        

	BOARD DATE:            10 December 1998 
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AC98-09938

	I certify that hereinafter is recorded the record of consideration of the Army Board for Correction of Military Records in the case of the above-named individual.

	Mr. Loren G. Harrell		Director	
	Ms. Joyce A. Wright		Analyst	

The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Ms. JoAnn H. Langston		Chairperson	
	Mr. James M. Alward		Member	
	Mr. Stanley Kelley		Member	

	The Board, established pursuant to authority contained in 10 U.S.C. 1552, convened at the call of the Chairperson on the above date.  In accordance with Army Regulation 15-185, the application and the available military records pertinent to the corrective action requested were reviewed to determine whether to authorize a formal hearing, recommend that the records be corrected without a formal hearing, or to deny the application without a formal hearing if it is determined that insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate the existence of probable material error or injustice.

	The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein.

	The Board considered the following evidence:

	Exhibit A - Application for correction of military 
            records
	Exhibit B - Military Personnel Records (including
	            advisory opinion, if any)

APPLICANT REQUESTS:  In effect, that his general discharge be upgraded to an honorable discharge; that his narrative reason for separation be changed to a more favorable reason; and that his separation authority be changed.

APPLICANT STATES:  In effect, that his narrative reason for separation and
separation authority is incorrect.  In support of his application he submits a
copy of his DD Form 214, a letter from Retirements and Separation Branch dated
20 January 1998, a copy of DA Form 4466 (Alcohol and Drug Abuse Prevention Control Program Client Progress Report), copy of his discharge proceedings, a copy of DA Form 2627 (Record of Proceeding under Article 15, UCMJ), a copy of his military police report, a copy of DA Form 3822 (Report of Mental Status Evaluation), a copy of his Standard Form 93 (Report of Medical History), and a copy of his Standard Form 88 (Report of Medical Examination). 

EVIDENCE OF RECORD:  The applicant's military records show:

He enlisted on 15 July 1986 for a period of 4 years.

On 9 August 1988, nonjudicial punishment (NJP) was imposed against the applicant for wrongful possession of marijuana.  His punishment consisted
of a reduction to the pay grade of E-3, a forfeiture of pay, and 14 days extra
duty.

On 23 December 1988, NJP was imposed against the applicant for being AWOL from 1 December 1988 to 6 December 1988.  His punishment consisted of a reduction to the pay grade of E-2, a forfeiture of pay, and 14 days restriction and extra duty.

On 10 January 1989, NJP was imposed against the applicant for failure to go to his appointed place of duty.  His punishment consisted of a reduction to the pay grade of E-1, a forfeiture of pay, and 14 days restriction and extra duty.

The applicant underwent a mental evaluation on 12 January 1989, which determined that he could distinguish between right and wrong and that he 
possessed sufficient mental capacity to participate in administrative or judicial proceedings.

On 24 January 1989, the applicant was notified that action to separate him 
from the service was being initiated under the provisions of Army Regulation
635-200, chapter 14, paragraph 14-2c, by reason of misconduct-abuse of illegal
drugs.  He acknowledged receipt of the notification and after consulting with counsel, he opted not to submit a statement in his own behalf.

On 26 January 1989, the commander initiated the recommendation for separation from the service under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, 
chapter 14-12b, for patterns of misconduct.  He based his recommendation on the applicant’s NJP, possession of marijuana and numerous counseling statements.  

The appropriate authority approved his request 16 February 1989 under the provision of AR 635-200, chapter 14, paragraph 14-12-b, for patterns of misconduct and directed that he be issued a General Discharge Certificate. 

Accordingly, he was discharged under honorable conditions on 1 March 1989
under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 14, paragraph 12-c for patterns of misconduct-abuse of illegal drugs.  He had served 2 years, 
7 months, and 12 days of total active service and had 5 days of lost time due to AWOL. 

The applicant applied to the Army Discharge Review Board (ADRB) for an upgrade of his discharge on 1 March 1998.  The ADRB noted that the applicant’s discharge was approved under the provisions AR 635-200, chapter 14-12b for
misconduct-patterns of misconduct.  However, his DD 214 shows that he was
discharged under the provisions of chapter 14-12c misconduct–abuse of illegal drugs.  The ADRB determined that an authority within the discharge process improperly changed the applicant’s separation authority from chapter 
14-12b to 4-12c.  Accordingly, on 6 August 1998 the ADRB voted to change the narrative reason and separation authority to chapter 14-12b patterns of misconduct.

Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of
enlisted personnel.  Chapter 14, establishes policy and prescribes procedures for separation of member for misconduct.   Specific categories include minor
disciplinary infractions, a pattern of misconduct, commission of a serious offense, conviction by civil authorities, desertion or absences without leave.  Action will be taken to separate a member for misconduct when it clearly establishes that rehabilitation is impracticable or is unlikely to succeed.

DISCUSSION:  Considering all the evidence, allegations, and information presented by the applicant, together with the evidence of record, applicable law and regulations, and advisory opinion(s), it is concluded:

1.  The applicant’s administrative separation was accomplished in compliance
with applicable regulations with no indication of procedural errors which could
jeopardize his rights.

2.  The type of discharge directed and the reasons therefore were appropriate
considering all of the facts of the case.
3.	Notwithstanding the decision by the ADRB to change the narrative reason 
and separation authority, the Board finds no evidence to show that his characterization of service at the time was improper or was inequitable.

4.  The applicant has failed to convinced the Board through the evidence submitted or the evidence of record that his discharge was unjust and should be
upgraded.

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

DETERMINATION:  The applicant has failed to submit sufficient relevant evidence to demonstrate the existence of probable error or injustice.

BOARD VOTE:

________  ________  ________  GRANT

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

__jhl____  ___ja ___  ___sk ___  DENY APPLICATION

						Loren G. Harrell
						Director

INDEX

CASE ID	AC98-09938	
SUFFIX		
RECON	 	
DATE BOARDED	1998/12/10	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE	GD	
DATE OF DISCHARGE	1989/03/01	
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY	AR635-200	
DISCHARGE REASON		
BOARD DECISION	NC	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.  A66.00		
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.