MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:   

	BOARD DATE:           13 January 1999                   
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AC98-11298
				   AR1999014792

	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. Loren G. Harrell		Director	
	Mr. William Blakely		Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Mr. Thomas N. Kuhn		Chairperson	
	Mr. Walter T. Morrison		Member	
	Ms. Margaret V. Thompson		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:  In effect, that his honorable discharge be changed to a medical discharge.

APPLICANT STATES:  That he should have received a medical discharge instead of being discharged for unsatisfactory performance.  He states that he never used or abused amphetamines and was never afforded the opportunity for drug treatment.  He states that his back condition is service connected and that he needs long term medical care.  In support of his contention the applicant submits a VA Rating Decision dated 1 September 1978 in which his back was nonrated.  He also submits a copy of his separation physical that certified him as an amphetamine abuser and not amenable to treatment and that he was qualified for separation.

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

The applicant was inducted in the Army on 6 June 1976 for a period of 2 years.  He was awarded military occupational specialty 13B (Field Artillery Crewman).  His highest rank attained was private (E-2).

While assigned in Germany the applicant received nonjudical punishment for disobeying a lawful order and was also barred from reenlistment.  The file indicates that the applicant was enrolled in an alcohol rehabilitation program following an incident in which he and another soldier were under the influence of alcohol and were thrown from the third floor.  He was also enrolled in a drug rehabilitation program for testing positive for amphetamines.

The applicant’s discharge packet is missing from his military records; however, his separation document (DD Form 214) shows he was administratively discharged on 12 August 1975 under the provisions of Chapter 13, Army Regulation 635-200, unsatisfactory performance.  His service was characterized as honorable.  He had completed 1 year, 2 months, and 7 days of creditable active service.

The applicant’s medical records were not present in the records reviewed by the Board.

Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel.  Chapter 13 contains the policy and outlines the procedures for separating individuals for unsatisfactory performance, and provides, in pertinent part, that commanders will separate a member under this chapter when, in the commander’s judgment, the member will not develop sufficiently to participate satisfactorily in further training and/ or become a satisfactory soldier. 

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 separated from the Army for unsatisfactory performance.  Although his medical records were not available for review by the Board, in the absence of evidence to the contrary, it must be presumed that the applicant’s discharge was accomplished in accordance with applicable laws and regulations with no indication of any violation of his rights.

2.  The applicant has failed to convince the Board through the evidence submitted or the evidence of record that he should have received a medical discharge instead of being separated for unsatisfactory performance.

3.  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

____X____  ____X____  ____X____  DENY APPLICATION

						Loren G. Harrell
						Director

INDEX

CASE ID	AC	
SUFFIX		
RECON	YYYYMMDD	
DATE BOARDED	YYYYMMDD	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE	(HD, GD, UOTHC, UD, BCD, DD)	
DATE OF DISCHARGE	YYYYMMDD	
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY	AR .  .  .  .  .  	
DISCHARGE REASON		
BOARD DECISION	(NC, GRANT , DENY, GRANT PLUS)	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.		
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.