MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:   

	BOARD DATE:           1 February 2001
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR2000045575

	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	
	Mr. Michael L. Engle		Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Mr. Luther L. Santiful		Chairperson	
	Mr. James E. Anderholm		Member	
	Ms. Barbara J. Lutz		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 discharge under other than honorable conditions be upgraded to honorable and that his reentry code (RE) be changed from RE-3 to RE-1.

APPLICANT STATES:  That he had a flawless record until his assignment to the Federal Republic of Germany (FRG) where he became a heroin addict.  He further states that it took him 15 years to purge himself of drug abuse and is now asking for the help he was denied by the Army in 1976 when he was discharged in his time of need.  In support of his application he submits a copy of his Report of Separation from Active Duty (DD Form 214), letters of support, and personnel and medical documents relating to his administrative discharge.  He contends that these character statements and records should provide a basis to upgrade his discharge to honorable and to change his RE code from RE-3 to RE-1.

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

He enlisted in the Army on 26 November 1973 for 3 years.  He completed his initial training and was assigned for duty as a structures specialist (51C) at Fort Eustis, Virginia.  On 1 November 1974 he was awarded a secondary military occupational skill as a machinist (44E).  He attained the rank of specialist four on 8 November 1974.  The applicant was assigned to the FRG on 4 August 1975 for duty with Company A, 317th Engineer Battalion.  

On 12 February 1976 the applicant was found to wrongfully possess 0.08 grams of a heroin mixture and a hypodermic syringe with needle.

On 18 March 1976 the applicant was enrolled as an active participant in the local drug rehabilitation program.  On 24 June 1976 a medical examination confirmed opiate abuse by the applicant.  The doctor recommended that the commander either reenter the applicant into the active drug program or to declare him a rehabilitation failure.

The applicant’s discharge packet is missing from his military records.  However, his DD Form 214 and separation orders show that he was administratively discharged on 20 July 1976 under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 10 for the good of the service, in lieu of trial by court-martial.  His service was characterized as under other than honorable conditions.  He completed       2 years, 7 months and 25 days of creditable active service with no lost time.

There is no evidence that the applicant applied to the Army Discharge Review Board for upgrade of his discharge within its 15-year statute of limitations.

Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel.  Chapter 10 of that regulation provides, in pertinent part, that a member who has committed an offense or offenses for which the authorized punishment includes a punitive discharge may at any time after the charges have been preferred, submit a request for discharge for the good of the service, in lieu of trial by court-martial.  A discharge under other than honorable conditions is normally considered appropriate.

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.  Lacking evidence to the contrary, administrative regularity is presumed in the applicant’s administrative separation under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 10, for the good of the service, to avoid trial by court-martial.

2.  The type of discharge directed and the reasons therefor were appropriate considering all available facts of the case.

3.  The applicant’s contention that his discharge should be upgraded and his RE code changed to RE-1, based upon the evidence presented with his application, is without merit.  While his good post service conduct is very commendable, it is not sufficient to warrant an upgrade of his discharge.

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

__LLS___  ___JEA__  __BJL___  DENY APPLICATION

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

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2000045575	
SUFFIX		
RECON	20010201	
DATE BOARDED	YYYYMMDD	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE	(HD, GD, UOTHC, UD, BCD, DD, UNCHAR)	
DATE OF DISCHARGE	YYYYMMDD	
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY	AR .  .  .  .  .  	
DISCHARGE REASON		
BOARD DECISION	(NC, GRANT , DENY, GRANT PLUS)	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.	A70.00	
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.