MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:   

	BOARD DATE:           11 March 2003                  
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR2002074479

	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. G. E. Vandenberg		Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Mr. Samuel A. Crumpler		Chairperson	
	Mr. Ted S. Kanamine		Member	
	Ms. Shirley L. Powell		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 second discharge be upgraded.

APPLICANT STATES:  In effect, that he had been a good service member until he got tired and fed up and then made some stupid mistakes.  He states that the problems started after his return from Vietnam when he again got mixed up with drugs.

He contends that the letters of reference that he submits show that he has gotten his life together and warrants an upgrade.

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

The applicant entered active duty on 7 August 1969 on a three-year active duty service obligation.  He completed basic combat training, advanced individual training and was awarded the military occupational specialty (MOS) 55B (Ammunition Storage Specialist).  He reenlisted on 15 May 1970 after 9 months and 8 days of service.  

The applicant served in Vietnam in the military occupational specialty (MOS) 55B (Ammunition Storage Specialist) with the 46th Ordnance Company from 4 September 1970 through 28 November 1970; the 504th Ordnance Detachment from 29 November 1970 trough 30 July 1971; and the 611th Ordnance Company from 31 July 1971 through 31 August 1971. 

The applicant received non-judicial punishment (NJP) under Article 15, Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) on 4 February 1971, for twice sleeping on his guard post, and on 28 July 1971, for breaking restriction.

On 29 May 1971, a special court-martial found the applicant guilty of possession of narcotics paraphernalia and possession of marijuana.  His sentence included reduction in grade and 3 months confinement.  The confinement was suspended for 6 months.

The applicant is reported to have been absent without leave or in confinement for the following periods, 20 March 1972 through 9 April 1972, 13 April 1972 through 2 July 1973, 4 July 1972 through 31 January 1973, 12 through 14 March 1973, 4 February 1973, and 5 February 1973 through 31 October 1973.  

While in an AWOL status the applicant was arrested on drug charges by civilian authorities.  On 9 February 1973, he was found guilty of being an accessory to the selling of dangerous drugs.  He was placed on probation and returned to military control. 

On 3 August 1973, the applicant’s company commander recommended that the applicant be discharged based upon the civilian conviction and his subsequent misconduct.

On 25 September 1973, after consulting with counsel, the applicant acknowledged he had been advised of and understood his rights under the Uniform Code of Military Justice.  He acknowledged that he could receive an undesirable discharge (UD) which would deprive him of many or all of his benefits as a veteran and that he could expect to experience substantial prejudice in civilian life if he received a discharge under other than honorable conditions.

The discharge authority approved the applicant’s discharge, and directed that he be reduced to the lowest enlisted grade and discharged with the issuance of an Undesirable Discharge Certificate.

The applicant was discharged on 19 November 1973, with an under conditions other than honorable characterization of service.  He was shown to have had 3 years, 4 months, and 9 days of creditable service with 604 days of lost time.

The applicant applied to the Army Discharge Review Board (ADRB) in 1975.  At that time he stated at he had been using illegal drugs since his sophomore year of high school and was still using them when he enlisted.  He states that he kicked the habit until he was sent to Vietnam when he got back into using drugs because he felt his job was insignificant.  He stated that he started selling drugs and became addicted to heroin.  He tested positive on a random urinalysis and was sent to a drug dependence program at Fort Hood, Texas.  Upon release from the program he was transferred to Fort Carson but not allowed to work in his MOS.  This caused him to revert to drug use and sales again.  He was arrested and convicted by civilian authorities for a felony offense and released to the Army on probation.  Because he was not able work in his MOS he again went AWOL.  On 21 July 1976, the ADRB denied relief.

The applicant submits a statement from the Burns Police Department indicating they had no record of negative police involvement from 1974 to 1995.  

He also submits three letters of reference from employers who describe him as a valuable employee, with an excellent job attitude.  He is described as well liked and respected by his co-workers.

DISCUSSION:  Considering all the evidence, allegations, and information presented by the applicant, together with the evidence of record and applicable law and regulations, it is concluded:

1.  The discharge proceedings were conducted in accordance with law and regulations applicable at the time. The character of the discharge is commensurate with the applicant's overall record of military service.

2.  While the Board notes the applicant’s admission of a drug problem and the positive actions he has taken to overcome that problem, it finds these efforts are not so meritorious as to outweigh the offense that led to his discharge.

3.  The letters attesting to the applicant’s good character and post-service adjustment and conduct are also noted, but they are insufficient as the sole basis for relief because they do not outweigh the repeated misconduct that led to the applicant’s separation. 

4.  The applicant's misconduct, 604 days lost due to incarceration or AWOL, outweighs his 30 months of honorable service and tour in Vietnam.  Therefore, the Board concludes that there is insufficient evidence to grant the requested relief.

5.  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.

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

_SAC___  __TSK __  __SLP___  DENY APPLICATION

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

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2002074479	
SUFFIX		
RECON		
DATE BOARDED	20030311	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE		
DATE OF DISCHARGE		
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY		
DISCHARGE REASON		
BOARD DECISION	DENY	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.	144.	
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.