MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:      

	BOARD DATE:            30 December 1998
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AC98-10814
                                          AR1998014061

	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. Lee Cates		Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Mr. George D. Paxson		Chairperson	
	Ms. Sherri V. Ward 		Member	
	Mr. Van B. Cunningham		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 to show that his service was characterized as honorable.

APPLICANT STATES:  That his separation was unfair because he had pseudofolliculitis (barbae), which caused him to be unable to shave.

EVIDENCE OF RECORD:  The applicant's military records show the applicant enlisted on 5 May 1969.  He served in Korea from 1 October 1969 to                  4 December 1970.  He was separated on 21 June 1971, based on the expiration of his term of service, with a General Discharge.

The evidence of record shows that, during the period 1 August 1969 through      2 June 1971, he was convicted by a special court-martial for being absent without leave (AWOL); assault on another soldier with a razor; communicating a threat to another soldier; wrongful use of another soldier’s Liberty Pass; and, failure to have his identification card.  His sentence was confinement at hard labor (suspended) and a forfeiture of pay.  Additionally, he accepted nonjudicial punishment under Article 15, Uniform Code of Military Justice, on four occasions for being AWOL; leaving his appointed place of duty without authority; dereliction in the performance of his duties; and, stealing from the post exchange.  His punishments included forfeitures of pay, extra duties, restriction and a reduction.

Medical records show he was issued a physical profile for pseudofolliculitis (barbae), which prohibited his shaving, shortly after his entry on active duty.  There is no indication that the characterization of his service was related to this profile.

Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations - Enlisted Personnel), indicates, in pertinent part, that a soldier will be separated from active duty upon the expiration of his term of service.  A Report of Separation will be issued documenting that period of active duty.  The regulation, in effect at the time, required that the character of service be based on the service member’s conduct and efficiency for the entire period of service of his or her service.

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 separation from active duty was accomplished in compliance with applicable regulations with no indication of procedural errors jeopardizing his rights.

2.  The type of discharge directed and the reasons therefor were appropriate considering all the facts of the case.

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

GDP____  SVW____  VBC_____  DENY APPLICATION

						Loren G. Harrell
						      Director