RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


      IN THE CASE OF:


      BOARD DATE:         12 September 2006
      DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20060002162


      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             |
|     |Ms. Maria C. Sanchez              |     |Analyst              |


      The following members, a quorum, were present:

|     |Mr. Allen L. Raub                 |     |Chairperson          |
|     |Ms. Linda M. Barker               |     |Member               |
|     |Mr. Qawly A. Sabree               |     |Member               |

      The Board considered the following evidence:

      Exhibit A - Application for correction of military records.

      Exhibit B - Military Personnel Records (including advisory opinion,
if any).

THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE:

1.  The applicant requests reconsideration to upgrade of his discharge to
either a general or honorable discharge.

2.  The applicant states, in effect, that he and his family have suffered
long enough from the mistakes he made as a young man and that he has done
all the necessary things to get the help he needed.

3.  The applicant provides a letter from The Salvation Army, dated 12
October 2005; a letter from the Aimwell Missionary Baptist Church, dated 10
October 2005; and a Volunteer Mobile Inc. Workshop Attendance Sheet, dated
7 October 2003, in support of his application.

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  Incorporated herein by reference are military records which were
summarized in the previous consideration of the applicant's case by the
Army Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR) in Docket Number
AR2002072666, on 24 October 2002.

2.  The applicant enlisted in the Army on 13 June 1986 for a period of
three years.  Records show he served in Germany during the period 6 October
1986 through 22 October 1988.  Records further show he had an extensive
record of indiscipline which consists of two nonjudicial punishments [for
theft, operating a motor vehicle while under the influence of alcohol and
for failure to go to his appointed place of duty], a letter of reprimand
[for misuse of alcohol and unsafe operation of a motor vehicle], and three
negative counseling statements [for his pattern of misconduct and for
failure to show-up for extra duty].

3.  The applicant submitted a letter from The Salvation Army, dated 12
October 2005.  The Corp Salvage Rehabilitation Case Manager stated that the
applicant entered and satisfactorily completed the Corp Salvage
Rehabilitation Program.  The Corp Salvage Rehabilitation Case Manager
states that the applicant's prognosis is good as long as he follows the
recommendation to continue attending Alcoholics Anonymous and Narcotics
Anonymous meetings weekly and obtains a permanent sponsor.




4.  The applicant submitted a letter of support from a minister at the
Aimwell Missionary Baptist Church, Mobile, Alabama, dated 10 October 2005.
The minister states that she met the applicant while he was going through a
rehabilitation program.  The minister continues that the applicant
participated in a course of study which she led and from her observation,
he was very open and honest.

5.  The minister states that the applicant acknowledges that he made bad
choices in life and he accepts responsibility for the circumstances and
consequences he was forced to endure.  The minister concludes that the
applicant's steps to recovery were voluntary and despite the circumstances
that led to his discharge, he is proud of the positive years of service
that he gave to our country.

6.  The applicant submitted a Volunteer Mobile Incorporated Workshop
Attendance Sheet which shows that he attended Anger/Stress and
Budget/Finance Workshops on 7 October 2003.

7.  Army Regulation 635-200 (Active Duty Enlisted Administrative
Separations) 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 under other than
honorable conditions 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.

8.  Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 3-7, provides that an honorable
discharge is a separation with honor and entitles the recipient to benefits
provided by law.  The honorable characterization is appropriate when the
quality of the member's service generally has met the standards of
acceptable conduct and performance of duty for Army personnel (emphasis
added), or is otherwise so meritorious that any other characterization
would be clearly inappropriate.  Whenever there is doubt, it is to be
resolved in favor of the individual.



9.  Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 3-7, provides that a general
discharge is a separation from the Army under honorable conditions.  When
authorized, it is issued to a Soldier whose military record is satisfactory
but not sufficiently meritorious to warrant an honorable discharge.  A
characterization of under honorable conditions may be issued only when the
reason for the Soldier’s separation specifically allows such
characterization.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant requests reconsideration to upgrade his discharge to
either a general or an honorable discharge.

2.  The ABCMR commends the applicant's post service achievements and
conduct; however, good post service conduct alone is not a basis for
upgrading a discharge.

3.  Evidence of record clearly shows the applicant received a nonjudicial
punishment for theft and driving under the influence, a letter of reprimand
for misuse of alcohol, and a negative counseling statement for failure to
show-up for extra duty.

4.  Evidence shows that the applicant was properly and equitably discharged
in accordance with the regulations in effect at the time.  Lacking evidence
to the contrary, it is determined that all requirements of law and
regulations were met and the rights of the applicant were fully protected
throughout the separation process.

5.  The applicant's administrative separation was in compliance with
applicable regulations with no indication of procedural errors which would
tend to jeopardize his rights.  The type of discharge and reason for
separation were appropriate considering all the facts of the case.

6.  Since the applicant's records show an extensive pattern of misconduct
including theft, driving under the influence, and misuse of alcohol, his
quality of military service does not meet the standards of acceptable
conduct and performance of duty for Army personnel.  Therefore, he is not
entitled to either a general or an honorable discharge.

7.  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 regarding his request
to upgrade his discharge.
BOARD VOTE:

________  ________  ________  GRANT FULL RELIEF

________  ________  ________  GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

_ALR_____  _QAS___  _LMB__  DENY APPLICATION

BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION:

The evidence presented does not demonstrate the existence of a probable
error or injustice.  Therefore, the Board determined that the overall
merits of this case are insufficient as a basis to amend the decision of
the ABCMR set forth in Docket Number AR2002072666, dated 24 October 2002.




                                     __Allen L. Raub___
                                            CHAIRPERSON

                                    INDEX

|CASE ID                 |AR20060002162                           |
|SUFFIX                  |                                        |
|RECON                   |                                        |
|DATE BOARDED            |20060912                                |
|TYPE OF DISCHARGE       |UOTHC                                   |
|DATE OF DISCHARGE       |1989/10/30                              |
|DISCHARGE AUTHORITY     |AR 635-200, ch 14                       |
|DISCHARGE REASON        |Misconduct                              |
|BOARD DECISION          |DENY                                    |
|REVIEW AUTHORITY        |Mr. Chun                                |
|ISSUES         1.  189  |110.0000.0000                           |
|2.                      |                                        |
|3.                      |                                        |
|4.                      |                                        |
|5.                      |                                        |
|6.                      |                                        |


-----------------------
[pic]