PROCEEDINGS

	IN THE CASE OF: 

	BOARD DATE:            1 June 2000                  
	DOCKET NUMBER:    AR1999030768

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

	Mr. Carl W. S. Chun		Director	
	Mr. Walter Avery, Jr.		Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Mr. James C. Hise		Chairperson	
	Mr. Raymond V. O'Connor, Jr.		Member	
	Mr. Melvin H. Meyer		Member	

	The applicant and counsel if any, did not appear before the Board.

	The Board considered the following evidence:

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

FINDINGS:

1.  The applicant has exhausted or the Board has waived the requirement for exhaustion of all administrative remedies afforded by existing law or regulations.

2.  The applicant requests that his Under Honorable Conditions (General) discharge be upgraded to a honorable discharge.

3.  The applicant states that when he was discharged 19 years ago, he was advised that after some period of time it would automatically upgrade to a honorable discharge. 

4.  In support of his application a supporting statement was handwritten on the DD Form 149.  The statement reads “Discharge based on use of drugs – I submit that the applicant is no longer a part of that type of life and that he is supportive of other suffering addicts.”

5.  The applicant’s military records show that he entered the Regular Army on    18 October 1983.  He completed training as a single channel radio operator and was stationed at Fort Benning, Georgia until his separation. 

6.  On 13 February 1984 the applicant was administered an Article 15 for the       wrongful possession of a controlled substance, 5.4 grams of marijuana.

7.  Subsequent to the Article 15 action he was twice promoted.  On 18 April 1984 he was promoted to pay grade E-2 and on 1 September 1984 to pay grade E-3.

8.  On 14 December 1984 his commander notified him that he was being recommended for separation under the provisions of Chapter 14, Army Regulation 635-200, for misconduct due to drug abuse.

9.  On 20 February 1985 the discharge approving authority approved the recommendation and directed issuance of a general discharge.

10.  On 25 February 1985 the applicant was discharged in pay grade E-3 for misconduct – drug abuse. He had completed 1 year, 4 months and 8 days of creditable service.  His awards included the Army Service Ribbon, and the Sharpshooter Qualification Badge with M-16 Rifle Bar.  Except for the                13 February 1984 Article 15, no other evidence of disciplinary action, counseling or rehabilitative measures was found in the record.

11.  On 2 March 1987, the Army Discharge Review Board denied the applicant’s request for an upgrade of his discharge.

12.  Chapter 14, Army Regulation 635-200 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.

CONCLUSIONS:

1.  From a purely administrative standpoint, the applicant’s discharge from service was accomplished in accordance with the applicable regulations in effect at the time of separation.  However, it appears it was not done in the spirit or the intent of the regulation.  The cited chapter indicates that except for serious offenses commanders are expected to take rehabilitative actions prior to considering a misconduct discharge - this was not done.  The command did not utilize any lesser punishment, such as a letter of reprimand or another Article 15. Neither is there any evidence of counseling or rehabilitative attempts.  It appears that the command had not clearly established that rehabilitation was impracticable or was unlikely to succeed.  Moreover, it must be noted that he was twice promoted after the initial infraction and prior to his separation.

2.  In view of the foregoing, the applicant’s records should be corrected as recommended below.

RECOMMENDATION:

That all of the Department of the Army records related to this case be corrected by issuing to the applicant a Honorable Discharge Certificate with a separation date of 25 February 1985, in lieu of the Under Honorable Conditions (General) he now holds.

BOARD VOTE:  

__jch____  __rvo___  __mhm__  GRANT AS STATED IN RECOMMENDATION

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

________  ________  ________  DENY APPLICATION

		__________James C. Hise______
		        CHAIRPERSON

INDEX

CASE ID	AR1999030768	
SUFFIX		
RECON	YYYYMMDD	
DATE BOARDED	20000601	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE	(HD, GD, UOTHC, UD, BCD, DD, UNCHAR)	
DATE OF DISCHARGE	YYYYMMDD	
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY	AR . . . . .  	
DISCHARGE REASON		
BOARD DECISION	GRANT	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.	131.05	
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.