MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:   

	BOARD DATE:           03 February 1999                   
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AC98-11141
                                                AR1998014380

	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. Michael L. Engle		Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Mr. Samuel A. Crumpler		Chairperson	
	Mr. Fred K. McCoy		Member	
	Mr. Mark D. Manning		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 dishonorable (sic) discharge be upgraded to honorable.

APPLICANT STATES:  In effect, that he should have received a hardship discharge due to the death of his father, but his commander told him that it would take too long and that a chapter 5 discharge would be quicker.

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

He enlisted in the Army on 23 January 1980 for 3 years.  He successfully completed his initial training and was awarded military occupational specialty 72E, Telecommunications Center Operator.

On 20 June 1980 the applicant received nonjudicial punishment (NJP) under the provisions of Article 15, Uniform Code of Military Justice for being disrespectful in language toward his superior noncommissioned officer.  The punishment included a forfeiture of $75.00 and 7 days restriction and extra duty.

On 26 September 1980 the applicant received NJP for being disrespectful by making gestures towards his superior noncommissioned officer.  The punishment included a forfeiture of $104.00 ($74.00 suspended), and 7 days restriction and extra duty.

The applicant received formal counseling on 17 June, 24 September, and 25 September 1980 for his misconduct and attitude.

On 21 October 1980 the applicant’s commander initiated a recommendation to separate him from the military service under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 5-31, for failure to maintain acceptable standards for retention.  The commander cited that the applicant’s concern for his family’s welfare had led him to an attitude which created disciplinary problems for himself.  Further, the commander stated that the applicant felt he was unable to complete his obligation at that time.

The applicant acknowledged receipt of the separation action and elected to make a statement in his own behalf.  That statement is not available in the records.

On 31 October 1980 the appropriate authority approved the recommendation for the applicant’s release from active duty (REFRAD) and transfer to the Individual Ready Reserve (IRR) to complete the remainder of his military obligation.

Accordingly, he was honorably REFRAD on 6 November 1980.  He completed 9 months and 14 days of creditable active service.

On 29 January 1986 the applicant was honorably discharged from the IRR.

Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel.  Paragraph 5-31 (Expeditious Discharge Program) of that regulation, in effect at the time, provided in pertinent part, that members who have demonstrated that they cannot or will not meet acceptable standards required of enlisted personnel in the Army because of the existence of poor attitude, lack of motivation, lack of self-discipline, inability to adapt socially or emotionally, and/or failure to demonstrate promotion potential, may be separated when they have failed to respond to counseling.

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 accordance with applicable regulations with no indication of procedural errors which would tend to jeopardize his rights.

2.  There is no evidence of record, nor has the applicant provided any evidence to support his contention that he was improperly forced to accept discharge under Chapter 5.  Furthermore, the record of evidence shows that he received an honorable discharge rather than the dishonorable discharge he indicates in his application.

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	AC98-11141	
SUFFIX		
RECON	YYYYMMDD	
DATE BOARDED	1999.02.03	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE	(HD, GD, UOTHC, UD, BCD, DD)	
DATE OF DISCHARGE	YYYYMMDD	
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY	AR .  .  .  .  .  	
DISCHARGE REASON		
BOARD DECISION	DENY	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.	A25.00	
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.