MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:   

	BOARD DATE:           4 March 1999                   
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR1999022525

	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	
	Mr. Vic Whitney		Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Mr. Curtis W. Barbee		Chairperson	
	Ms. Elizabeth Buchanon		Member	
	Mr. Raymond J. Wagner		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:  That his general discharge be upgraded to fully honorable.  Additionally, he requests, in effect, a change to his reenlistment (RE) code to one that would allow reentry in the service.

APPLICANT STATES:  That he believes that an error was made when he did not receive an honorable discharge.  He believes that he should have received an honorable discharge.  He submits no documentation in support of his request.

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

He enlisted and entered active duty on 27 September 1988.  After completion of training he served in the US and Germany.  He was promoted to pay grade E4 effective 1 November 1990.

On 11 December 1991 he was punished under Article 15, UCMJ for steeling 12 bottles of alcohol from a German city festival.  The punishment included reduction to pay grade E3.

A 7 July 1992 military police report states that an 18 May 1992 urinalysis reflected that the applicant had been using marijuana.  At a 10 July 1992 mental status evaluation the applicant's behavior was normal.  He was fully alert and oriented and displayed an unremarkable mood.  His thinking was clear, his thought content normal and his memory good.  There was no significant mental illness.  The applicant was mentally responsible.  He was able to distinguish right from wrong and to adhere to the right.

On 2 September 1992 the applicant was again punished under Article 15, UCMJ for the marijuana offense.  The punishment included reduction to pay grade E2.

On 29 October 1992 the commander informed him of contemplated separation actions for misconduct.  After consulting with counsel on 30 October 1992, the applicant requested consideration of his case by a board of officers and to submit statements in his own behalf.  In his request he acknowledged that he might be ineligible for many or all veteran’s benefits if discharged under other than honorable conditions.  NOTE:  There are no statements in the available record and a soldier is only entitled to a hearing if he has 6 or more years creditable service.

The separation authority, a brigadier general, approved the request and directed issuance of a general discharge.  Effective 16 December 1992 the applicant was discharged in pay grade E2 under authority of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 14.  He had 4 years, 2 months, and 20 days creditable service and no lost time.  His character of service is shown as under honorable conditions and his RE code is RE-3.

On 9 June 1997 the Army Discharge Review Board, in a unanimous decision, voted to deny the applicant an upgrade or recharacterization of his discharge.

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

2.  The Board has noted the contentions of the applicant.  However, either evidence submitted with the application or the evidence of record does not support them.  The discharge process was in accordance with applicable law and regulations and the applicant's service was appropriately characterized.

3.  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

__CWB___  __EB____  __RJW___  DENY APPLICATION

						Loren G. Harrell
						Director

INDEX

CASE ID	AR1999022525	
SUFFIX		
RECON		
DATE BOARDED	19990304	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE	GD	
DATE OF DISCHARGE	19921216	
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY	AR 635-200, Chap 14	
DISCHARGE REASON	A67.00	
BOARD DECISION	(DENY)	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.	110.02	
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.