MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:        

	BOARD DATE:            14 January 1999 
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AC98-12664
				   AR1998012379

	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	
	Ms. Wanda L. Waller		Analyst	

The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Mr. Raymond V. O’Connor, Jr.		Chairperson	
	Ms. Shirley L. Powell		Member	
	Ms. Kathleen A. Newman		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 general.  

APPLICANT STATES:  That it has been 16 years since he was discharged and he is now married with two children.     

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

He enlisted in the Army Reserve on 7 March 1979 for a period of 6 years.  He was transferred to Fort Leonard Wood, Missouri, and successfully completed his basic training.  While in advanced individual training (AIT), between 19 June 1979 and 23 July 1979, nonjudicial punishment (NJP) was imposed against the applicant on three occasions for communicating a threat to injure, attempted arson, disobeying a lawful order (DOLO) from a SFC and failure to go to his appointed place of duty (FTG).

On 31 July 1980, the applicant was discharged from the Army Reserve and he enlisted in the Regular Army for a period of 3 years.

Between 25 September 1980 and 20 November 1981, NJP was imposed against the applicant on 10 separate occasions for dereliction in performance of duty
(2 specifications), larceny, FTG (3 specifications), failure to obey lawful order
(2 specifications), disrespect, DOLO, breaking restriction, AWOL, possession of marijuana and disrespectful language.  

His commander initiated a recommendation to bar him from enlistment on
18 November 1981, citing the applicant’s disciplinary record, failure to pay a telephone debt and failure to respond to numerous counseling sessions.  The bar to reenlistment was approved by the appropriate authority on 9 December 1981. 

On 7 December 1981 his commander initiated a recommendation to separate him from the service under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 14, for patterns of misconduct – frequent incidents of discreditable nature with civil or military authorities.  The commander’s recommendation was based on the applicant’s habitual disciplinary problems and his assessment that the applicant was given every opportunity for rehabilitation and was a detriment to the unit’s welfare.  

After consulting with counsel, the applicant waived his rights to a hearing of his case before a board of officers, representation by counsel and a separation physical examination.  He also elected not to make a statement in his own behalf.

The appropriate authority approved the recommendation for separation from the service on 28 December 1981 and directed that he be discharged under other than honorable conditions.

Accordingly, he was discharged under other than honorable conditions on
 4 January 1982 under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 14.  He had served 1 year, 10 months and 19 days of total active service and had 
1 day lost time due to AWOL.

On 11 September 1985 the Army Discharge Review Board denied his request for upgrade of his discharge.

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, convictions by civil authorities, desertion or absence without leave.  Action would be taken to separate a member for misconduct when it was clearly established that rehabilitation is impracticable or is unlikely to succeed.

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 type of discharge directed and the reasons therefore were appropriate considering all the facts of the case. 

3.  The applicant failed to convince the Board through the evidence submitted or the evidence of record that his discharge was unjust and should be upgraded.

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

___rvo __  __slp____  __kln ___  DENY APPLICATION

						Loren G. Harrell
						Director

INDEX

CASE ID	AC98-12664/AR1998012379	
SUFFIX		
RECON	 	
DATE BOARDED	1999/01/14	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE	UOTHC	
DATE OF DISCHARGE	1982/01/04	
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY	AR635-200, CH 14	
DISCHARGE REASON		
BOARD DECISION	NC	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.  A60.00		
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.