MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:   

	BOARD DATE:            16 December 1998                  
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AC98-12073

	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.  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Mr.	Ernest M. Willcher		Chairperson	
	Ms.	Lana E. McGlynn		Member	
	Ms.	Carol J. Suiter		Member	

	Also present, without vote, were:

	Mr.	Loren G. Harrell		Director	
	Mr. 	Ed Clark		Analyst	

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

	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:   Correction of appropriate military records to show a reentry eligibility (RE) code which would allow reenlistment.  In effect, this constitutes a request for removal or waiver of those disqualifications which preclude reenlistment.

APPLICANT STATES:  In essence, that he has had employment problems since leaving the military; and that he feels that he could do a good job if given a second chance.  A Member of Congress has requested that the application be expedited.

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

He was enlisted in the Regular Army on 20 July 1994.  Following completion of basic and advanced individual training, he was assigned to an air defense artillery unit in Korea.

A General Counseling Form shows that he was counseled by his supervisor on 27 April 1995 and advised to improve his motivation and initiative.

A General Counseling Form shows that he was counseled by his supervisor concerning a letter of indebtedness addressed to the commander of the unit.

A General Counseling Form shows that he was counseled by his supervisor on 
5 May 1995 for being absent at the time prescribed from two scheduled formations.

A General Counseling Form shows that he was counseled by his supervisor on 22 June 1995 for poor performance of duty.  The supervisor wrote that during a field exercise the applicant showed “a flagrant display of insubordination and failure to perform your duties or job up to any standards; that despite repeated counseling, he showed “an extreme lack of self-discipline…[and] you find most on the spot corrections or counseling comical.”

A General Counseling Form shows that he was counseled by a noncommissioned officer on 10 July 1995 after he was apprehended by the military police for “knocking over cans and kicking doors” and for drinking while enrolled in the Army Drug and Alcohol Abuse Prevention and Control Program (ADAPCP).  The NCO wrote, in part, “This is not the first time this has happened.”

On 5 September 1995 the clinical director, ADAPCP provided a memorandum to the applicant’s commander.  The memorandum shows that the applicant had 
7 unexcused absences from the program; that the applicant had been involved in two major incidents, one of which required medical treatment and the reporting of the incident to his commander; that the applicant’s participation in the program was sporadic and that he had not appeared motivated to change and continued to show poor judgement.  He wrote that the applicant’s counselor rated the applicant’s progress as unsatisfactory.

On 1 February 1996 his commander recommended that he be separated from the service under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 9, Alcohol or Drug Abuse Rehabilitation Failure.  The commander stated that the applicant had been caught twice drinking while enrolled in the program; and that he was recommending that the applicant be issued a general discharge.  On the same date, following consultation with a military lawyer, the applicant waived his right to submit statements in his own behalf.  

On 8 February 1996 the recommendation was approved by the convening authority, the brigade commander, who directed that the applicant be issued a General Discharge Certificate.

On 27 February 1996, with 7 months and 8 days total active service, he was discharged.  His separation document, DD Form 214, reflects code RE-4.

On 21 April 1997 the Army Discharge Review Board (ADRB) unanimously determined that the applicant’s discharge was proper; however, stating that Army regulations mandated an honorable discharge in cases of this type, changed the characterization of his discharge to honorable.

Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 9, Alcohol or Other Drug Abuse Rehabilitation Failure, paragraph 9-4, provides that an honorable discharge is mandated in any case in which the Government initially introduces limited use evidence into the final discharge process.

Pertinent Army regulations provide that prior to discharge or release from active duty, individuals will be assigned RE codes, based on their service records or the reason for discharge. Army Regulation 601-210 covers eligibility criteria, policies, and procedures for enlistment and processing into the Regular Army (RA) and the US Army Reserve.  Chapter 3 of that regulation prescribes basic eligibility for prior service applicants for enlistment. That chapter includes a list of armed forces RE codes, including RA RE codes.  Code RE-4 applies to individuals with a nonwaivable disqualification.

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

1.  Despite repeated counseling and being enrolled in the Drug and Alcohol Abuse Program, the applicant continued his egregious behavior.  He was appropriately recommended for separation from the service.

2.  The applicant’s RE code, as shown on his DD Form 214, is correct and in accordance with regulation.

3.  The applicant’s contention that he now feels that he could do a good job if given a second chance in the military is not a sufficient basis on which to grant his request.

4.  In order to justify correction of a military record the applicant must show to the satisfaction of the Board, or it must otherwise satisfactorily appear, that the record is in error or unjust.  The applicant has failed to submit evidence that would satisfy the aforementioned requirement.

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

EMW____  LEM____  CJS_____  DENY APPLICATION

						Loren G. Harrell
						Director

INDEX

CASE ID	AC98-12073	
SUFFIX		
RECON	NA	
DATE BOARDED	1998 December 16	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE	GD	
DATE OF DISCHARGE	1996 February 27	
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY	AR .  .  .  .  .  	
DISCHARGE REASON		
BOARD DECISION	DENY	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.	110.00	
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.