MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:    

	BOARD DATE:            18 March 1999     
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR1999023405

	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. James M. Alward		Chairperson	
	Ms. Karen Y. Fletcher		Member	
	Mr. Ernest W. Lutz, Jr.		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 narrative reason for separation be changed.  

APPLICANT STATES:  That he was not discharged for misconduct.  

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

He enlisted in the Army Reserve under the delayed entry program and entered active duty on 4 October 1993 for a period of 6 years.  He successfully completed basic training at Fort Jackson, South Carolina, and was transferred to Fort Eustis, Virginia, for advanced individual training as a helicopter repairman.

The applicant’s records show that nonjudicial punishment was imposed against the applicant on 29 June 1995 (nature of misconduct not available).  His punishment consisted of a reduction to pay grade E-2.

The facts and circumstances surrounding the applicant’s discharge are not present in the available records.  However, his records indicate that on
9 November 1995 he was discharged under honorable conditions (general) under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 14, paragraph
14-12c(2) for misconduct.

Item 28 (Narrative Reason for Separation) of the applicant’s DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) shows “Misconduct”.

The applicant applied to the Army Discharge Review Board (ADRB) on 
24 April 1996 for an upgrade of his discharge to honorable.  He cited in his application to the ADRB that he was unable to continue his education due to financial difficulties and that he needed an honorable discharge to receive educational benefits from the Montgomery GI Bill.  The ADRB denied his application for upgrade of his discharge on 13 January 1998.

Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel.  Chapter 14 establishes policy and prescribes procedures for separating members for misconduct.  Specific categories include minor disciplinary infractions, a pattern of misconduct, commission of a serious offense, and convictions by civil authorities.  Action will be taken to separate a member for misconduct when it is clearly established that rehabilitation is impracticable or is unlikely to succeed.  A discharge under other than honorable conditions is normally appropriate for a soldier discharged under this chapter.  However, the separation authority may direct a general discharge if such is merited by the soldier’s overall record.  Only a general court-martial convening authority may approve an honorable discharge or delegate approval authority for an honorable discharge under this provision of regulation.

Army Regulation 635-5-1 serves as the authority for separation program designator codes and narrative reasons for separation.  It states, in pertinent part, that personnel separated under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 14, paragraph 14-12c(2) will be issued a narrative reason for separation of “Misconduct”.

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 the absence of evidence of the contrary, it must be presumed that the applicant’s administrative separation under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 14, for misconduct, was administratively correct and in conformance with applicable regulations.  

2.  The narrative reason for separation indicated on the applicant’s DD Form 214 is correct, given the circumstances of the applicant’s discharge.  Therefore, there is no reason to change it.  

3.  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.

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

___jma__  __kyf___  __ewl_____  DENY APPLICATION

						Loren G. Harrell
						Director

INDEX

CASE ID	AR1999023405	
SUFFIX		
RECON		
DATE BOARDED	19990318	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE	(GD)	
DATE OF DISCHARGE	19951109	
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY	AR635-200 CHAPTER 14	
DISCHARGE REASON	MISCONDUCT	
BOARD DECISION	(DENY)	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.110	191	
2.144	404	
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.