MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION


         IN THE CASE OF:
        


         BOARD DATE: 17 June 2003
         DOCKET NUMBER: AR2003084764

         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. Beverly A. Young		Analyst

The following members, a quorum, were present:

Mr. Fred N. Eichorn		Chairperson
Mr. Hubert O. Fry		Member
Ms. Marla J. Troup		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 under other than honorable conditions (UOTHC) discharge be changed to a general under honorable conditions discharge.

APPLICANT STATES: That he was scheduled for treatment for drugs and alcohol abuse but he was not given the opportunity to begin treatment. He claims that he was discharged before he began treatment. He states that his mother died when he was stationed in Germany which caused him to start drinking and using drugs. He claims that his conduct as a food inspector was commendable and that he was constantly complimented on his work as a food inspector. His superiors assured him that his discharge could get upgraded. He states that his drug and alcohol abuse escalated after the death of his mother. In conclusion, the applicant states that he has been controlled by drugs and alcohol since his discharge 19 years ago, but he was set free from this bondage in December 2001. In support of his application, he submitted a copy of his DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty).

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

The applicant enlisted in the Regular Army on 6 May 1980 for a period of four years. He successfully completed basic and advanced individual training and served as a veterinary food inspector specialist in Germany from 22 October 1980 through 20 October 1982. He was advanced to private first class on 12 January 1981.

On 13 August 1982, the applicant was punished under Article 15, Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ), for wrongful possession of marijuana on two separate occasions and for failing to be at his appointed place of duty. His punishment consisted of reduction to private E-2 and forfeiture of $200.00 pay for 2 months.

Records show that the applicant's commander initiated a bar to reenlistment against him on 25 August 1982. The commander cited as the basis for the bar to reenlistment as the applicant's violation of Article 28 (Assault) and the Article 15, UCMJ, he received for violation of Article 134 (wrongful possession of marijuana) and Article 86 (absent from place of duty). In addition, the commander indicated that the applicant had received six late payment notices between October 1981 and April 1982 and that he was counseled on four different occasions.

The applicant received punishment under Article 15, UCMJ again on 15 April 1983, for breach of peace and for failing to obey a lawful order. On 20 April 1983, the commander dismissed Charge 1 for breach of peace and directed punishment of forfeiture of 4 days pay, extra duty for 7 days, and reduction to private E-1 (suspended for 60 days).

During the period May 1983 and July 1983, the applicant received negative counseling statements for being absent from his place of duty, for incidents of misconduct, and for lack of security of the inspection office.

On 15 July 1983, the applicant received punishment again under Article 15, UCMJ, for wrongfully damaging the property of another soldier in the amount of $110.00. His punishment consisted of forfeiture of 3 days pay and extra duty for 14 days.

On 26 July 1983, the applicant’s unit commander notified him of pending separation action under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 14, for pattern of misconduct. He was advised of his rights and was advised that an UOTHC discharge may be issued under this provision.

On 26 July 1983, the applicant acknowledged notification of the pending separation action, consulted with legal counsel, waived a hearing by a board of officers, and submitted a statement in his own behalf.

The unit commander recommended on 12 August 1983 that the applicant be eliminated from the service before the expiration of his term of service and that the rehabilitative transfer requirements be waived.

On 2 September 1983, the separation authority approved discharge under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 14-12b(2) and waived further rehabilitation efforts with issuance of an UOTHC Certificate.

The applicant was discharged on 15 September 1983 in pay grade E-1. He had 3 years, 4 months and 10 days of creditable service.

Prior to his discharge, the applicant underwent a mental status evaluation and a separation medical examination and was found fit for separation with a physical profile of 111111.

There is no evidence in the applicant's service personnel records which shows that he was diagnosed as a drug or alcohol abuser.

There is no evidence of record which shows the applicant applied to the Army Discharge Review Board within its 15-year statute of limitations.

Army Regulation 635-200, in effect at the time, set forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel. Chapter 14 established policy and prescribed procedures for separating members for misconduct. Specific categories include minor disciplinary infractions, a pattern of misconduct, commission of a serious offense, and convictions by civil authorities. Action would be taken to separate a member for misconduct when it was clearly established that rehabilitation was impracticable or was unlikely to succeed. A discharge under other than honorable conditions was normally appropriate for a soldier discharged under this chapter. However, the separation authority may direct a general discharge if such is merited by the soldier’s overall record. Only a general court-martial convening authority may approve an honorable discharge or delegate approval authority for an honorable discharge under this provision of regulation.

Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 3-7, provides that a general discharge is a separation from the Army under honorable conditions. When authorized, it is issued to a soldier whose military record is satisfactory but not sufficiently meritorious to warrant an honorable discharge. A characterization of under honorable conditions may be issued only when the reason for the soldier’s separation specifically allows such characterization.

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 administrative separation was accomplished in compliance with applicable regulations with no indication of procedural errors which would tend to jeopardize his rights.

2. The Board considered the applicant's contention that he was scheduled for treatment for drug and alcohol abuse but he was discharged before he had the opportunity to begin treatment.

3. However, there are no medical records available to the Board which indicate that the applicant was scheduled for treatment for drug or alcohol abuse while in the service.

4. The Board considered the applicant's contention that his conduct as a food inspector was commendable during the time in question.

5. The evidence of record shows the applicant received three Articles 15 for wrongful possession of marijuana, for being absent from his place of duty, for failing to obey a lawful order, and damaging the property of another soldier.

6. The Board noted that the applicant also received a bar to reenlistment and several adverse counseling statements for misconduct.

7. The applicant has provided no evidence of error or injustice which would warrant changing the characterization of his discharge from under other than honorable conditions to general under honorable conditions. Therefore, the Board has determined that there is no basis for granting the applicant's request.
8. 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.

9. 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____ HOF____ MJT____ DENY APPLICATION

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

---

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2003084764
SUFFIX
RECON	YYYYMMDD
DATE BOARDED	20030617
TYPE OF DISCHARGE	(HD, GD, UOTHC, UD, BCD, DD, UNCHAR)
DATE OF DISCHARGE	YYYYMMDD
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY	AR . . . . .
DISCHARGE REASON
BOARD DECISION	DENY
REVIEW AUTHORITY	Mr. Chun
ISSUES 1.	144.0000
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.