MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:   

	BOARD DATE:           28 January 1999                   
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AC98-11347
				   AR1998012077

	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. Gale Thomas		Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Mr. Luther L. Santiful		Chairperson	
	Mr. Robert W. Garrett		Member	
	Mr. Curtis L. Greenway		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 records be corrected by upgrading his discharge to honorable.

APPLICANT STATES:  That his physical profile prevented him from performing the duties of his Military Occupational Specialty (MOS); and that he was never reclassified into a secondary MOS, and was denied the opportunity to reclassify into any other MOS.  

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

On 29 December 1978, he reenlisted in the Regular Army for a period of 4 years, in the pay grade of E-4.

Between 1 November 1979 and 5 April 1983, he accumulated 4 nonjudicial punishments under the provisions of Article 15, UCMJ, for, the wrongful possession and distribution of marijuana; being absent from his place of duty; being disrespectful to superior noncommissioned officers (4 counts); disobeying a lawful order (2 counts); and being drunk while on duty as Duty Driver for the brigade.  His punishment’s included reduction, forfeiture, extra duty and restriction. 

On 3 February 1984, his commander notified him of his intent to recommend that he be separated under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 13-2, for unsatisfactory performance.  

Having been advised by legal counsel, the applicant authenticated a statement with his signature in which he indicated he understood the ramifications of receiving a less than fully honorable discharge and declined the opportunity to submit statements in his own behalf.  

On 13 February 1984, his commander recommended that he be discharged under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 13, for frequent incidents of unsatisfactory performance, displays of perpetual apathy toward military requirements, and an unwillingness to perform in the basic capacity expected of him as a soldier. 

On 13 February 1984, the appropriate separation authority approved the applicant’s discharge and the issuance of an under honorable conditions (general) discharge.

On 2 March 1984, the applicant was discharged under the above cited regulation.  His Report of Separation indicated he had 5 years, 2 months and 4 days of creditable service.

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.  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 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.

3.  There is no evidence in the available records to substantiate the applicant’s claim that his physical profile hindered his duty performance, or that he was denied the opportunity to reclassify.  

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

___lls____  __rwg___  ___clg__  DENY APPLICATION

						Loren G. Harrell
						Director

INDEX

CASE ID	AC98-11347/R1998012077	
SUFFIX		
RECON	YYYYMMDD	
DATE BOARDED	19990128	
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.