MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:       

	BOARD DATE:            19 AUGUST 2003                  
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR2003086678

	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. Fred N. Eichorn		Chairperson	
	Ms. Margaret V. Thompson		Member	
	Mr. John T. Meixell		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. 

APPLICANT STATES:  That he was young, and made one mistake in 5 1/2 years because of his bad judgment.  His years of honorable service should outweigh one bad mistake.  He has been working hard to change his life for the better.

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

The applicant enlisted in the Army for three years on 26 February 1979, completed training, and in June 1979 was assigned to an infantry company at Fort Stewart, Georgia.  On 26 August 1981, the applicant, then a Specialist Four, reenlisted in the Army for five years, and in December of that year was assigned to Fort Lewis, Washington as an infantryman.  On 25 January 1982 he was awarded the Good Conduct Medal for the period 26 February 1979 to                25 February 1982.

On 25 June 1982 the applicant was dropped punitively from an Noncommissioned Officer (NCO) course for leaving the course area without permission.   

On 2 July 1982 the applicant received nonjudicial punishment under Article 15, Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ), for sleeping on guard duty and for failing to go to his place of duty.  He was reduced to pay grade E-1.

The applicant was advanced to the rank of private first class on 1 March 1983.  In July 1983 he was assigned to an infantry company of the 2nd Infantry Division in Korea.  He was promoted to pay grade E-4 on 1 October 1983.

On 20 July 1984 the applicant consulted with counsel and voluntarily requested discharge for the good of the service under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 10.  He stated that he acknowledged that he was guilty of the charges against him which authorized the imposition of a bad conduct or dishonorable discharge.  He stated that under no circumstances did he desire further rehabilitation.  He stated that he understood the nature and consequences of the discharge under other than honorable conditions that he might receive.  He declined to submit a statement in his own behalf.  He requested a delay in the processing of all court-martial charges pending final action on his request for discharge. 

Court-martial charges were prepared against the applicant on 28 July 1984 for transferring duty free or tax-free goods to a person not authorized those privileges, for purchasing goods for illegal transfer or production of income, for making a false official statement with intent to deceive, and for wrongful possession of marijuana.    

An 8 September 1984 investigating officer's report of charges under Article 32, UCMJ, indicated that the applicant had admitted to black marketing activities, e.g., violation of a lawful general regulation by purchasing in excess of prescribed limits and/or reasonably anticipated needs and wrongful transfer of duty free goods.  That investigation also indicated that there was the possibility of guilt on the part of the applicant concerning the possession of illegal drugs; however, the evidence did not so substantiate.  The investigating officer recommended that the applicant be processed for separation for misconduct.

On 15 September 1984 the separation authority approved the applicant's request for discharge for the good of the service, and directed that the charges and specifications referred to court-martial be withdrawn.  He directed that the applicant be issued a discharge certificate Under Other Than Honorable Conditions.

The applicant was discharged on 27 September 1984.  He had 5 years,              7 months, and 1 day of service.

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.  The applicant's request for a chapter 10 discharge, even after appropriate and proper consultation with a military lawyer, tends to show he wished to avoid the court-martial and the punitive discharge that he might have received.  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.  The applicant's contention that he was young and immature at the time is not sufficiently mitigating to warrant relief.  The Board notes that the applicant completed training, was 23 years old and had over five years of service at the time of his misconduct.  The Board also notes his profession of good post service conduct.  In view of the nature of his misconduct, that is also not sufficiently mitigating to warrant relief.

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

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 evidence that would satisfy that requirement.

5.  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

__FNE __  __MVT__  __JTM___  DENY APPLICATION

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

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2003086678	
SUFFIX		
RECON	YYYYMMDD	
DATE BOARDED	20030819	
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.