MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:   

	BOARD DATE:           7 May 2002                   
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR2002068801

	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. Carl W. S. Chun		Director	
	Mrs. Nancy Amos		Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Mr. Samuel A. Crumpler		Chairperson	
	Mr. Kenneth W. Lapin		Member	
	Mr. John T. Meixell		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 under honorable conditions be upgraded to honorable and that his rank be restored.

APPLICANT STATES:  That he is in the process of enlisting in the U. S. Army Reserve.  He had a few problems while in the Army but he has grown up.  He was happy with the Army in 1984.  He was engaged and working hard at gaining his E-4.  Things changed when he got a company commander who believed that anyone from California was a bum.  His girlfriend left and he requested a few days to see her but this was not allowed.  Things got worse.  The relationship failed and he lost his girl and he began drinking and smoked (marijuana) a few times.  He failed a drug test and this was the opportunity for his commander to give it to him.  He was stripped of all his rank, he could no longer afford the bills he had, his drinking worsened, and his platoon leader asked him about taking a general discharge.  He saw this as the only way out.  He gave up drugs over 10 years ago and has been sober for over 10 years.  He would love the opportunity to make up for his mistakes.  He provides no supporting evidence.

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

He was born on 31 August 1964.  He enlisted in the Regular Army on                  9 November 1983.  He completed basic training and advanced individual training and was awarded military occupational specialty 64C (Motor Transport Operator).

On 2 August 1984, the applicant accepted nonjudicial punishment (NJP) under Article 15, Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) for disobeying a lawful order to get his hair cut.  His punishment was to perform 7 days extra duty.

On 20 November 1985, the applicant accepted NJP under Article 15, UCMJ from his 0-6 level commander for wrongfully using some amount of marijuana.  His punishment was to be reduced two pay grades to pay grade E-1, to perform 45 days extra duty, to be restricted for 45 days, and to forfeit $310.00 pay for two months (suspended).  

On 26 November 1985, the applicant’s commander initiated separation proceedings under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 13 for unsatisfactory performance.  He cited the applicant’s indebtedness, failure to obey orders, dishonored checks, physical fitness test failure, failure to repair, and positive urinalysis as the reasons for the recommended action.

On 3 December 1985, the applicant was advised by consulting counsel of the basis for the contemplated separation action.  He did not submit a statement in his own behalf.  

On 6 December 1985, the applicant underwent a mental status evaluation.  He was found to have the mental capacity to understand and participate in proceedings and to be mentally responsible.  He was diagnosed as having a mixed personality disorder with histrionic, passive-aggressive, and antisocial components.  

On 19 December 1985, the appropriate authority approved the recommendation and directed that the applicant be given a general discharge.

On 30 December 1985, the applicant was discharged, with a general discharge under honorable conditions, in pay grade E-1, under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 13, unsatisfactory performance.  He had completed 2 years, 1 month, and 21 days of creditable active service and had no lost time.  He was given a reenlistment code of 3.

Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel.  Chapter 13 contains the policy and outlines the procedures for separating individuals for unsatisfactory performance and provides, in pertinent part, that commanders will separate a member under this chapter when, in the commander’s judgment, the member will not develop sufficiently to participate satisfactorily in further training and/or become a satisfactory soldier.

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 this requirement.

2.  The applicant’s administrative separation was accomplished in compliance with applicable regulations with no indication of procedural errors which would tend to jeopardize his rights.  Considering the numerous though mostly minor instances of misconduct committed by the applicant, the type of discharge given was appropriate.  

3.  There is no evidence of error in the administration of the November 1985 Article 15.  The applicant indicates in his statement to the Board that this was not an isolated instance of drug use.  The commander was authorized to impose the punishment of a two-grade reduction and it appears to be appropriate considering the offense.  

4.  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

__sac___  __kwl___  __jtm___  DENY APPLICATION

		    Carl W. S. Chun
		    Director, Army Board for Correction
    of Military Records

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2002068801	
SUFFIX		
RECON		
DATE BOARDED	20020507	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE	GD	
DATE OF DISCHARGE	19851230	
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY	AR 635-200, ch 13  	
DISCHARGE REASON	A04.00	
BOARD DECISION	(DENY)	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.	110.00	
2.	129.06	
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.