MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF: 

	BOARD DATE:            17 June 1998
	DOCKET NUMBER:    AC98-07564

	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.  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Mr.	Curtis W. Barbee		Chairperson	
	Ms.	Karen L. Wolff		Member	
	Mr.	Edward Williamson		Member	

	Also present, without vote, were:

	Mr.	Loren G. Harrell		Director	
	Mrs.	Carolyn G. Wade		Analyst	

	The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein.

	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, that his discharge under other than honorable conditions (UOHC) be upgrade and that he has suffered for 24 years for being AWOL.

APPLICANT STATES:  In effect, that his crime was AWOL not murder; that he has been punished for 24 years and that is long enough; and that he does not want to be judged further.

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

On 31 October 1973 he enlisted in the Regular Army for a period of 4 years, basic combat training (BCT) at Fort Leonard Wood, Missouri, and assignment to Fort Hood, Texas.  At the time of his enlistment he was 24 years old, had completed high school, and achieved an Armed Forces Qualification Test score of 71 (i.e., mental category II).

He completed BCT at Fort Leonard Wood and was assigned to Fort Sill, Oklahoma, for advanced individual training (AIT) in military occupational specialty (MOS) 13B (Field Artillery Crewmen).  Upon completion of AIT he was awarded the 13B MOS and assigned to Fort Hood.

On 25 September 1975 he accepted nonjudicial punishment (NJP) under the provisions of Article 15, UCMJ, for twice being derelict in the performance of his duty.  His punishment consisted of a reduction in rank from corporal/E-4 to private first class/E-3 and a forfeiture of $100.00 (suspended).

On 21 October 1975 he accepted an NJP for a 3 day period of AWOL.  His punishment consisted of a reduction in rank from private first class/E-3 to private/E-2, a forfeiture of $50.00, and 7 days extra duty.

On 9 September 1976 he accepted an NJP for a 3 day period of AWOL.  His punishment consisted of a reduction in grade from the rank of specialist/E-4 to the rank of private first classs/E-3 and a forfeiture of $75.00.  On 9 September 1976 he appealed the punishment.  On 10 September 1976 the appeal was granted.  The reduction and forfeiture were set aside and all rights, privileges, and property were restored.

On 20 December 1976 he accepted an NJP for failure to go to his appointed place of duty.  His punishment consisted of a forfeiture of $25.00 and 14 days extra duty.

On 16 January 1977 he departed his unit in an AWOL status and did remain so absent until 4 April 1977 and on 7 April 1977 he absented himself again and did remain so absent until 19 April 1977.  On 13 April 1977 he was charged with the aforementioned periods of AWOL.  On 19 May 1977 he was found guilty by a special court-martial.  He was sentenced to 3 months hard labor, a forfeiture of $49.00 for 3 months, and a reduction in rank from specialist/E-4 to private/E-1. He was confined in the US Army Retraining Brigade, Fort Riley, Kansas.  While at Fort Riley, the applicant’s record indicated numerous acts of misconduct and many counseling sessions in which the applicant showed poor attitude and lack of motivation.

On 28 June 1977 the sentence was approved and executed.

On 28 June 1977 his commanding officer notified him of his intent to separate him from the Army for unfitness under the provisions of chapter 13, paragraph 13-5a (1), Army Regulation 635-200 by reason of his frequent incidents of a discreditable nature with civil or military authorities.

On 29 June 1977 having been advised of his rights by legal counsel, the applicant authenticated a statement with his initials and signature in which he acknowledged the aforementioned notification, declined a board of officers, and declined to submit a statement in his own behalf.

On 11 July 1977 the separation authority approved the applicant’s discharge with an UOHC.  Accordingly, on 3 august 1977, at Fort Riley, Kansas, the applicant was discharge after completing 3 years, 3 months, and 11 days of active military service and 172 days of lost time.

On 30 October 1977 the Army Discharge Review Board denied the applicant’s request for an upgrade of his discharge.

Army Regulation 635-200 in effect, set forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel.  Chapter 13 established the policy and prescribed the procedures for separating members for unfitness.  Paragraph 13-5a, provided for the separation of individuals determined to be unfit by reason of frequent incidents of a discreditable nature with civil or military authorities.  Individuals separated under the provisions of paragraph 13-5a would normally receive a UD.

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.  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 the aforementioned requirement.

2.  The evidence of record shows that the command attempted to assist the applicant in performing and conducting himself to Army standards by providing counseling, by the imposing nonjudicial punishment and assigning him to the Retraining Brigade.  The applicant failed to respond appropriately to these efforts.

3.  The contentions of the applicant have been noted by the Board.  The evidence of record indicate the discharge process was in accordance with applicable law and regulations and the applicant’s service was appropriately characterized.

4.  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

___cwb__  ___klw__  ___ew___  DENY APPLICATION

						Loren G. Harrell
						Director