MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:      

	BOARD DATE:           25 JULY 2002                   
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR2002071651

	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. Kenneth H. Aucock		Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Mr. Raymond V. O’Connor		Chairperson	
	Mr. Richard T. Dunbar		Member	
	Mr. Kenneth W. Lapin		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:  In effect, the applicant requests that his bad conduct discharge be upgraded to honorable or general.  

APPLICANT STATES:  That for twenty years he has suffered for something that he did not do.  The applicant provides a two page narrative in which he describes his upbringing and the incidents during his service which resulted in his discharge.  He stated that he was helping his mother and his brother, that he was not a bad person, and should not be punished for what his brother did.  He joined the Army to be a military policeman, but instead went into the infantry.  He reenlisted, but hurt his ankle, resulting in limited duties.  He got on the wrong side of an E-7.  He entered a room where others were smoking weed, and the platoon sergeant walked in.  His room was inspected, the military police summoned, and he was arrested, even though he had done nothing wrong.  He was reduced in rank, and required to perform extra duty.  He performed guard duty every day until his trial.  When he got out of jail he discovered that the E-7 had been living with his wife.  His wife left him.  He tried to serve his country, but a lawyer saw it differently.  He is locked away from society and no one cares.  All he wanted to be was a good soldier.  In a separate statement the applicant states that the only thing that he did wrong was let his brother into his home.  His brother committed a crime in his home and put him and his family at risk.  As a result he was punished.  His brother came forward to tell the truth, but no one would listen.  

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

The applicant had two distinct periods of military service.  He first enlisted in the Army for six years in the delayed entry program on 8 August 1974, and was discharged from that program upon his enlistment in the Regular Army for three years on 29 August 1974.  The applicant completed basic combat training and in November 1974 was assigned to Fort Lee, Virginia, for advanced training.  

On 8 January 1975 the Director, Enlisted Support Department recommended that the applicant be relieved from class due to his poor attitude, lack of motivation, and complete lack of responsibility.  That official indicated that the applicant had been enrolled in the course since 5 November 1974 and had missed 98 hours of academic time.  An evaluation form indicates that the applicant had demonstrated no motivation, and appeared to be a very immature and irresponsible person who was looking for a free ride.  He had no military bearing and did not know what military courtesy was.  An evaluating officer indicated that the applicant would never be an asset to the service and could only end up being a disciplinary problem.  Another officer stated that the applicant was the most un-soldierly soldier in the unit, that he was irresponsible and lazy, and made excuses for everything he failed to do.  That officer stated that the applicant had been on the borderline of receiving nonjudicial punishment but had always managed to elude.  That officer added a statement at a later date that the applicant had received nonjudicial punishment for seven days of AWOL.  The applicant was AWOL from 13 January 1975 to 20 January 1975. 

Prior to going AWOL, the applicant’s commanding officer notified the applicant that he was initiating action to discharge him from the Army because he was unacceptable for further military service due to his inability to adapt emotionally to military life.  The applicant consulted with counsel and stated that he understood the nature and consequences of the contemplated discharge.  He declined to submit a statement in his own behalf.  The applicant’s commanding officer recommended to the separation authority that the applicant be discharged.  
On 21 January 1975 the separation authority approved the recommendation. 
The applicant was discharged on 28 January 1975.  He had 4 months and        23 days of service and 7 days of lost time.

On 24 July 1978 the applicant enlisted in the Army for three years, enlisting for training in an infantry MOS (military occupational specialty).  He completed basic combat training at Fort Dix, New Jersey, and infantry training at Fort Benning, Georgia.  In November 1978 he was assigned to Fort Riley, Kansas.  On             1 February 1980 he received nonjudicial punishment under Article 15, UCMJ, for failure to go to his place of duty, and for willfully disobeying a lawful order.  On    5 June 1980 he received punishment for failure to go to his place of duty. 

In July 1980 the applicant was transferred to Fort Ord, California.  On 26 January 1981 the applicant reenlisted in the Army for three years, opting for training as a personnel management specialist.  In April 1981 he was transferred to Fort Benjamin Harrison, Indiana for training.  On 21 May 1981, both the acting class advisor and the acting director of the AIT (advanced individual training) department of the Adjutant General School indicated that the applicant did not have the aptitude to be productive in the personnel field.  In June 1981 the applicant was transferred to Fort Benning, Georgia, as an infantryman.   

On 6 November 1981 the applicant received nonjudicial punishment for failing to go to his place of duty.  On 10 November 1981 he received nonjudicial punishment for dereliction of duty, in that he willfully failed to remain alert while posted as a guard.

Before a special court-martial which convened at Fort Benning, Georgia, on         16 February 1982, the applicant was arraigned, tried, and found guilty of wrongfully having in his possession 99 grams, more of less, of marihuana.  He was sentenced to be discharged from the service with a bad conduct discharge, forfeiture of $200.00 per month for a term of six months, and to be confined at hard labor for a term of six months.  Special Court-Martial Order Number 196,    30 December 1982, indicates that the sentence was affirmed, and directed that the sentence be duly executed.  The applicant was discharged on 25 February 1983 under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 3, section IV.

Army Regulation 635-200 provides for the separation of enlisted personnel.  Paragraph 3-11 states that a member will be given a bad conduct discharge pursuant only to an approved sentence of a general or special court-martial.  The appellate review must be completed and the affirmed sentence ordered duly executed.   

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.  Notwithstanding the applicant’s statements and allegations, there is no evidence and he has not provided any, to show that he was wrongfully arraigned, tried, and convicted of the charge of wrongfully possession of marihuana.  His sentence was affirmed and ordered executed.  He was discharged in accordance with the provisions of appropriate regulations.  

2.  The applicant has submitted neither probative evidence nor a convincing argument in support of his request.  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 that requirement.

3.  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

__RVO__  __RTD __  __KWL__  DENY APPLICATION

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

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2002071651	
SUFFIX		
RECON	YYYYMMDD	
DATE BOARDED	20020725	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE	(HD, GD, UOTHC, UD, BCD, DD, UNCHAR)	
DATE OF DISCHARGE	YYYYMMDD	
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY	AR .  .  .  .  .  	
DISCHARGE REASON		
BOARD DECISION	DENY	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.	110.00	
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.