APPLICANT REQUESTS:  That his general discharge be upgraded.

APPLICANT STATES:  The U. S. Army granted the applicant an honorable discharge.  The New Mexico Army National Guard granted him a general discharge due to violation of its drug policy (he had tested positive for marijuana).  He feels his discharge should be considered for upgrade because prior to this offense, his conduct was excellent.

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

He enlisted in the Army National Guard of New Mexico on 15 October 1986.  He was ordered to his initial active duty for training (IADT) on 1 December 1986.  He completed advanced individual training and was awarded military occupational specialty 31C (Single Channel Radio Operator).  His character of service upon his relief from active duty was uncharacterized.

There is no evidence in the records of any disciplinary actions prior to the applicant’s discharge.

The separation packet is not available.

On 15 November 1993, he was discharged from the New Mexico Army National Guard, in pay grade E-4, under the provisions of Army Regulation 135-178 and National Guard Regulation 600-200, for acts or patterns of misconduct, with a general discharge.  He had completed 7 years, 1 month and 1 day of total service for pay.

Army Regulation 135-178 sets forth the basic authority for the administrative separation of enlisted personnel from the Army National Guard and the U. S. Army Reserve.  Chapter 7 establishes policy and prescribes procedures for separating members for misconduct.  Abuse of illegal drugs is serious misconduct.  First-time offenders in grade E-1 through E-4 may be processed for discharge as appropriate.

National Guard Regulation 600-200 sets forth the basic authority for personnel actions, including separations, pertaining to soldiers in the National Guard.

On 28 August 1998, the Army Discharge Review Board (ADRB) denied the applicant’s request for an upgrade.

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

1.  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 and, in the absence of evidence to the contrary, it is presumed that the discharge proceedings were conducted in accordance with law and regulations applicable at the time.

2.  Therefore, 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

                       DENY APPLICATION

                           Loren G. Harrell       
					      Director