MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:       

	BOARD DATE:            06 MARCH 2003                   
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR2002074109

	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	
	Ms. Deborah L. Brantley		Senior Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Mr. Walter T. Morrison		Chairperson	
	Ms. Linda D. Simmons		Member	
	Mr. Frank C. Jones II		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 bad conduct discharge be upgraded.

APPLICANT STATES:  In effect, that aside from the single court-martial action, he has not had another single black mark against him.  He notes that he does not dispute his guilt but does state that he was diagnosed with a "substance dependency."  He states that he understands that it is appropriate to punish soldiers but he contends that his punishment has continued because of his inability to secure a job sufficient to care for his family.  He states that he has been drug and alcohol free since his discharge, is now married, and lives a stable life.  He also states that he is 12 credits shy of attaining a college degree. The applicant only asks for the Board's help to clear his name so that he can achieve a better life and fight for his county again if the need arises.  Beyond his self authored statement, he submits no evidence in support of his request.

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

He entered active duty on 20 April 1993 after initially being trained as a food service specialist in the United States Army Reserve.  Following his enlistment in the Regular Army, the applicant successfully completed training as a pharmacy specialist.  In October 1993, following completion of his training, he was assigned to the medical activity at Fort Campbell, Kentucky.  

The applicant was promoted to pay grade E-4 on 1 October 1993 and reduced to pay grade E-3 in December 1993.  The basis for the reduction in grade was not evident in available records.

In May 1995 the applicant commenced a 33 month confinement period resulting from a general court-martial in which the applicant was charged and found guilty, pursuant to his pleas, of one count of dereliction of duty between 26 July and 
10 August 1994, three counts of larceny of military property, three counts of wrongful possession of drugs, four counts of makes false official statements, and three counts of altering a public record.  Specifically, the applicant’s offenses included theft of approximately 820 Tylox pills (a control substance) from the military medical facility, possession of cocaine, “oxycodone,” and “methylphendiate,” and deceiving military officials by telling them that three different individuals had been duly prescribed the Tylox pills that he had stolen.  He also falsified computer records to show that the individuals had been prescribed the Tylox pills.  The applicant pled guilty to each of the charges.

His sentence, which was adjudged on 10 May 1995, included reduction to pay grade E-1, forfeiture of all pay and allowances, confinement for 33 months, and a dishonorable discharge.

In August 1996 the applicant was administratively paroled.

Subsequently his guilty plea regarding the three counts of altering a public record was set aside and those charges were dismissed by the Army Court of Criminal Appeals.  Additionally, his dishonorable discharge was ultimately upgraded, by the Army Clemency and Parole Board to a bad conduct discharge effective, 
9 September 1997, and finally affirmed.

He was placed in an excess leave status in January 1998 and on 16 April 1999 his bad conduct discharge was executed. 

Prior to the applicant's court-martial action he had been award the National Defense Service Medal and Army Service Ribbon.  There is no indication he was awarded any personal decorations.

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.  The applicant was a pharmacy specialist who abused the trust placed in him by stealing drugs from the pharmacy and then attempting to cover his theft by lying.  The Board notes that trial by court-martial was warranted by the gravity of the offenses charged.  The Board contends that his is particularly true considering the applicant’s training and position of trust.  The discharge appropriately characterizes the misconduct for which the applicant was convicted.

2.  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.  The actions of the Army in this case were proper, and there is no doubt to be resolved in favor of the applicant.

4.  While the Board does note the applicant’s contention that since his discharge he has developed a stable life and is pursuing his education and attempting to improve his employment opportunities, these issues, either in part or in whole, are insufficient to justify upgrading the applicant’s discharge.

5.  There is no evidence, and the applicant has not provided any, that his discharge was in error or unjust.  He has submitted no evidence which would serve as a basis to upgrade his discharge as a matter of equity.

6.  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

__WTM  _  __LDS__  ___FCJ__  DENY APPLICATION

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

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2002074109	
SUFFIX		
RECON	YYYYMMDD	
DATE BOARDED	20030306	
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.