MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:   

	BOARD DATE:           27 May 1999
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR1999023322

	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. Joyce A. Wright		Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Mr. Edward Williamson		Chairperson	
	Ms. Meta Waller		Member	
	Mr. Kenneth L. Wright		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 undesirable discharge be upgraded to a general discharge.

APPLICANT STATES:  In effect, that his discharge was too harsh considering the nature of the offenses.  He also states that he was young and immature which impaired his ability to serve.  In support of his application he submits a copy of two character references, a copy of his criminal history and a copy of his DD Form 214.

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

The applicant entered active duty on 13 September 1972 at over 20 years of age and served as a supply specialist.

On 16 November 1973, nonjudicial punishment (NJP) was imposed against the applicant for disobeying a lawful order from a noncommissioned officer.  His punishment consisted of a forfeiture of pay and 14 days extra duty.

On 4 March 1974, NJP was imposed against the applicant for failure to prepare and for abandoning his guard watch.  His punishment consisted of 20 days correctional custody and restriction.

The applicant was barred from reenlistment on 27 March 1974 for the aforementioned offenses.

He was convicted by a special court-martial on 24 April 1974 for resisting arrest and two specification of assault.  His sentence consisted of a forfeiture of pay and 45 days restriction.

On 30 May 1974, the applicant was notified by his commander that he was being recommended for discharge under the provisions of AR 635-200, chapter 13, for unfitness.  He based his recommendation on the applicant’s established pattern of shirking.  

After consulting with counsel, the applicant waived his rights to a hearing before 
a board of officers and representation by counsel and elected not to submit a statement in his own behalf.  He acknowledge that he might encounter substantial prejudice in civilian life and might be ineligible for many or all benefits administered by the Veterans Administration if a discharge under other than honorable conditions were issued.

On that same day the commander submitted his recommendation to separate the applicant under the provisions of AR 635-200, chapter 13, for unfitness.

On 4 June 1974, the separation authority approved the recommendation for discharge and directed that he be furnished an Undesirable Discharge Certificate.  The applicant was discharged on 14 June 1974.  He had a total of
1 year, 7 months and 25 days of creditable serve and 37 days of lost time due to AWOL.

There is no evidence that the applicant applied to the Army Discharge Review Board for an upgrade of his discharge with its 15-year statute of limitations.

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 Board noted the applicant contentions that his discharge was too harsh considering the nature of the offenses and that he was young and immature which impaired his ability to serve; however, there is no evidence in the available records, and the applicant has provided no evidence, to support his contentions.  The Board also notes the applicant was over 21 years of age at the time of his first offense.

2.  The applicant was advised of the effects of a discharge under other than honorable conditions and that he might be deprived of many or all Army and VA benefits.

3.  The applicant’s administrative separation was accomplished in compliance with applicable regulations.

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

5.  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.  

6.  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

EW_____  MW_____  KLW____  DENY APPLICATION

						Loren G. Harrell
						Director

INDEX

CASE ID	AR1999023322	
SUFFIX		
RECON	YYYYMMDD	
DATE BOARDED	19990527	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE	UD	
DATE OF DISCHARGE	19740614	
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY	AR 635-200	
DISCHARGE REASON		
BOARD DECISION	DENY	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1. 110		
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.