RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


      IN THE CASE OF:


      BOARD DATE:        25 January 2008
      DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20070012649


      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.

|     |Ms. Catherine C. Mitrano          |     |Director             |
|     |Mr. Joseph A. Adriance            |     |Analyst              |


      The following members, a quorum, were present:

|     |Mr. David K. Hassenritter         |     |Chairperson          |
|     |Mr. James R. Hastie               |     |Member               |
|     |Mr. Edward E. Montgomery          |     |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, in effect, reconsideration of his request for
an honorable discharge and retirement under the provisions of the Enlisted
Voluntary Early Transition Program-Temporary Early Retirement Authority
(TERA).

2.  The applicant states, in effect, that the conduct issues that led to
his discharge should have been resolved in his previous command, where he
claims he was interviewed by his commander and reprimanded.  He states that
if any reduction in rank or discharge action was to be taken, it should
have been done there in his previous command.

3.  The applicant provides self-authored statements and the record
documents identified in enclosure 4 to his application in support of his
request.

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
AR20060009256, on 19 December 2006.

2.  During its original review of this case, the Board found that the
applicant wrongfully used cocaine between 18 and 23 October 1989, while
assigned to Hawaii, which was documented in a Criminal Investigation
Division (CID) investigation finalized on 23 December 1989, which was the
last month of the applicant's assignment in Hawaii.  The Board also
determined that the applicant disobeyed a lawful command to appear at the
battalion commander's office in Hawaii, on 11 January 1990, and departed
absent without leave (AWOL), a status he remained in until reporting to his
new duty station at Fort Bliss, Texas, on 30 January 1990.  The Board
determined the applicant's brigade commander in Hawaii forwarded the
charges on the applicant to Fort Bliss and requested the new command
exercise its authority under the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) in
the disposition of the applicant's case; however, before his command at
Fort Bliss obtained the litigation packet it requested from Hawaii, the
applicant departed on permanent change of station to Korea in November
1991.  The Board also found that Fort Bliss officials forwarded the
applicant's entire litigation packet to Korea and requested appropriate
action be taken in December 1991, and that on 22 January 1992, the
applicant's chain of command in Korea initiated action to separate the
applicant by reason of misconduct-abuse of illegal drugs.

3.  The Board concluded that although the applicant had requested discharge
with a Special Separation Bonus (SSB) under TERA provisions, he was
ineligible based on his being investigated for UCMJ offenses and being
processed for administrative separation, which resulted in his request not
being processed and/or approved.  It further determined the applicant was
properly and equitably discharged in accordance with the applicable
regulation, and that there were no procedural errors which would tend to
jeopardize his rights.  As a result, the applicant's application was
denied.

4.  The applicant provides three self-authored statements with his
reconsideration request in which he reasserts his argument that he believes
his discharge and the denial of his request for TERA separation with a SSB
was unjust because the misconduct issue had been resolved at Fort Bliss,
where he was reprimanded by his unit commander.

5.  The applicant's record shows that he initially entered active duty on
15 February 1977.  His Personnel Qualification Record (DA Form 2-1) shows
he was trained in and awarded military occupational specialty 11B
(Infantryman), and that he was promoted to staff sergeant (SSG), which is
the highest grade he held while serving on active duty, on 23 December
1983.  It also shows that he earned the following awards during his active
duty tenure:  Army Achievement Medal (2nd Award); Army Good Conduct Medal
(4th Award); NCO Professional Development Ribbon with Numeral 2; Army
Service Ribbon; Overseas Service Ribbon with Numeral 3; Expert Marksmanship
Qualification Badge with Rifle, Machinegun and Grenade Bars; Expert
Infantryman Badge; and Air Assault Badge.  The record documents no acts of
valor.

6.  On 23 December 1989, while the applicant was serving in Hawaii, a CID
investigation determined the applicant wrongfully used cocaine between 18
and 23 October 1989.

7.  On 11 January 1990, the applicant failed to comply with a lawful
command from his unit commander to report to his battalion commander's
office for an Article 15 hearing, and he departed the command for Fort
Bliss.

8.  On 1 March 1990, the applicant's former brigade commander in Hawaii
forwarded a memorandum to the applicant's new command at Fort Bliss
outlining the applicant's violations of the UCMJ and requesting the new
commander exercise his authority under the UCMJ in the disposition of the
charges against the applicant.

9.  On 12 March 1990, Fort Bliss officials requested additional information
from Hawaii on the applicant's case, to include the litigation packet on
the applicant, and the record gives no indication that action was taken on
this matter before the applicant departed on a PCS to Korea on 3 November
1991.

10.  On 3 December 1991, the Fort Bliss commander forwarded the applicant's
entire litigation packet and associated documents to Korea and requested
appropriate action be taken.

11.  On 24 December 1991, the applicant requested early separation with a
SSB under TERA provisions.  There is no indication that this request was
ever processed or approved.

12.  On 22 January 1992, separation action was initiated on the applicant
based on his unsatisfactory performance based on the applicant's twice
failing the Advanced Noncommissioned Officer Course (ANCOC) and his abuse
of illegal drugs by wrongfully using cocaine between 18 and 23 October
1989.  The applicant consulted with legal counsel and after being advised
of the basis for the separation action and of his rights, he elected to
waive consideration of his case by a board of officers.

13.  On 5 February 1992, the separation authority approved the applicant's
separation under the provisions of Paragraph 14-12(c), Army Regulation
635-200, by reason of misconduct-abuse of illegal drugs, and directed
the applicant receive an under other than honorable conditions (UOTHC)
discharge.  On 26 February 1992, the applicant was discharged accordingly.
The separation document (DD Form 214) he was issued at the time shows he
had completed a total of 15 years and 12 days of creditable active military
service.

14.  On 25 February 1997, the Army Discharge Review Board (ADRB) upgraded
the characterization of the applicant's discharge to a general, under
honorable conditions discharge (GD) based on his overall record of service;
however, it determined that the misconduct reason for his separation was
proper and equitable.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant's contention that his discharge was unjust because the
misconduct he was separated for had been dealt with at his previous command
has been considered.  However, there is insufficient evidence to support
this claim.

2.  The evidence of record confirms the applicant's separation processing
was accomplished in accordance with the applicable regulation and that he
was ineligible for early separation under TERA provisions because he was
being processed for separation for misconduct at the time.  The applicant
consulted with counsel during his separation processing and elected to
waive his right to have his case considered by an administrative separation
board, at which he would have had the opportunity to present matters in
mitigation, including the issues he now presents.

3.  Absent evidence indicating the applicant's discharge was improper, it
is concluded that all requirements of law and regulation were met and the
applicant's rights were fully protected throughout the separation process.
Therefore, it would not be appropriate to grant the requested relief at
this time

4.  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 new evidence that would satisfy the aforementioned requirement, or
that would support amendment of the original board decision in his case.

BOARD VOTE:

________  ________  ________  GRANT FULL RELIEF

________  ________  ________  GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

__DKH __  __JRH __  __EEM  _  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 AR20060009256, dated 19 December 2006.





                                  ____David K. Hassenritter____
                                            CHAIRPERSON



                                    INDEX

|CASE ID                 |AR20070012649                           |
|SUFFIX                  |                                        |
|RECON                   |AR20060009256- 2006/12/19.              |
|DATE BOARDED            |2008/01/25                              |
|TYPE OF DISCHARGE       |GD                                      |
|DATE OF DISCHARGE       |1992/02/26                              |
|DISCHARGE AUTHORITY     |AR 635-200                              |
|DISCHARGE REASON        |Misconduct                              |
|BOARD DECISION          |DENY                                    |
|REVIEW AUTHORITY        |Ms. Mitrano                             |
|ISSUES         1.  189  |110.0000                                |
|2.                      |                                        |
|3.                      |                                        |
|4.                      |                                        |
|5.                      |                                        |
|6.                      |                                        |


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