MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:   

	BOARD DATE:            26 May 1999                  
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR1999015028

	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	
	Ms. Antoinette Farley		Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Mr. Mark D. Manning		Chairperson	
	Mr. Arthur A. Omartian		Member	
	Mr. Barbara J. Ellis		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 under other than honorable conditions (UOTHC) discharge, now a general discharge, under honorable conditions, be upgraded to an honorable discharge (HD).

APPLICANT STATES:  In effect, the discharge was inequitable because it was based on one incident in 76 months of service with no other adverse actions.  He has bettered himself by being drug free for 11 plus years, by working two job and having good attendance at both jobs and by attending church on Sunday.  He is truly ashamed of the mistakes made while in the Army.

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

He enlisted in the Regular Army for 4 years on 19 September 1978, and trained as an Indirect Fire Infantryman.  He was honorably discharged on 28 March 1982 and reenlisted for 4 more years on 29 March 1982. 

From September 1978 to June 1984, the applicant was stationed primarily in Germany.  On 29 September 1984, he received the first of two nonjudicial punishments (NJP’s) under Article 15, Uniform Code of Military Justice, for wrongful use of marijuana, a Schedule 1 controlled substance.  His punishment included reduction to pay grade E2, forfeiture of $334 pay per month for 2 months and 45 days of extra duty while restricted to the unit area.

On 11 October 1984, the applicant received his second NJP, for wrongful use of marijuana, a schedule I controlled substance.  His punishment included reduction to pay grade E1, forfeiture of $298 per month for 2 months and 45 days of extra duty.

On 6 November 1984, the applicant’s chain of command notified him that he was being processed for separation under the provision of Chapter 14, AR 635-200, by reason of misconduct-abuse of illegal drugs.  He consulted with legal counsel and acknowledged notification on 8 November 1984.  He stated that he understood his rights and wished to make a statement in his own behalf.  His chain of command recommended UOTHC discharge.  On an unknown date, the separation authority waived rehabilitation efforts and directed that the applicant be discharged with an UOTHC discharge.

On 29 January 1985, the applicant was discharged with a UOTHC discharge under the provision of Chapter 14, AR 635-200, by reason of misconduct-abuse of illegal drugs.  At the time of discharge, the applicant had 2 years, 10 months, and 1 day service on his current enlistment and 6 years, 4 months and 11 days total time in service.  His awards and decorations include the Good Conduct Medial (two awards), the Army of Occupation Medal (Berlin), and the Overseas Service Ribbon.

On 29 October 1998, the Army Discharge Review Board upgraded the applicant’s discharge to a general discharge, under honorable conditions with no change to the reason for separation.

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, and convictions by civil authorities.  Action will be taken to separate a member for misconduct when it is clearly established that rehabilitation is impracticable or is unlikely to succeed.  A discharge UOTHC is normally appropriate for a soldier discharged under this chapter.  However, the separation authority may direct a general discharge if such is merited by the soldier’s overall record.  Only a general court-martial convening authority may approve an honorable discharge or delegate approval authority for an honorable discharge under this provision of regulation.

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 applicant’s entire record of service was considered during the review of this case.  The Board was convinced that the reason for discharge and the upgrade of his characterization of service were both proper and equitable and that the applicant’s prior service was not sufficiently mitigating to grant the full relief requested.

3.  The applicant’s good post service adjustment is commendable; however, it does not overcome the seriousness of the drug related offenses for which he was discharged.

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

  MDM        AAO          BJE           DENY APPLICATION

						Loren G. Harrell
						Director

INDEX

CASE ID	AR1999015028	
SUFFIX		
RECON		
DATE BOARDED	1999 05 26	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE	UOTHC	
DATE OF DISCHARGE	1985 01 29	
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY	AR 635-200/CHAP 14	
DISCHARGE REASON	A6800	
BOARD DECISION	DENY	
REVIEW AUTHORITY	ABCMR	
ISSUES         1.	A94.31	
2.	126.00	
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.