MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:   

	BOARD DATE:           24 February 2000
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR1999026037

	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. David H. Keller		Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Ms. Celia L. Adolphi 		Chairperson	
	Mr. James P. Huber		Member	
	Ms. Margaret V. Thompson 		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 general discharge be upgraded to honorable.

APPLICANT STATES:  He submits no evidence or statement to support his request.

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

He enlisted on 23 September 1971 and, after training, was assigned to Germany.

On 7 January 1972, while undergoing advanced individual training, the applicant was administered nonjudicial punishment (NJP) under Article 15, UCMJ, for 
1 day AWOL on 6 January 1972.

On 8 June 1972, the applicant was administered NJP for failure to obey a lawful regulation by possessing a switchblade knife.

On 26 February 1973, the applicant was tried by summary court-martial and was found guilty of AWOL from 20 December 1972 to 7 January 1973.  He was sentenced to reduction in rank to private first class (suspended for 30 days), forfeiture of $200.00, and to perform extra duty for 18 days.

On 19 April 1973, he received NJP for failure to obey a lawful order and being disrespectful in language toward a commissioned officer.

On 14 June 1973, the applicant’s commander recommended he be discharged for unsuitability under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 13.  The applicant consulted with counsel and waived consideration by a board of officers and acknowledged that he might expect to encounter substantial prejudice in civilian life if he was issued a general discharge under honorable conditions.  He declined to submit a statement in his own behalf.  On 11 July 1973, the separation authority approved the recommendation and directed the applicant be issued a General Discharge Certificate.

The applicant was discharged on 23 July 1973 at Fort Dix, New Jersey.  He had 1 year, 9 months and 14 days of creditable service and 18 days of time lost.

Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the policy and prescribes the procedures for administrative separation of enlisted personnel.  Chapter 13, in effect at the time, provided for the separation of individuals whose record evidenced apathy (lack of appropriate interest), defective attitudes, and an inability to expend effort constructively.  When separation for unsuitability was warranted, an honorable or general discharge was issued as determined by the separation authority based upon the individual’s entire record.

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

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 compliance with applicable regulations, with no indication of procedural errors which would tend to jeopardize his rights.  The type of discharge directed and the reasons therefor were appropriate considering all the facts of the case.

2.  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.

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

__cla___  ___jph___  __mvt____  DENY APPLICATION

						Karl F. Schneider
						Director, Army Review Boards Agency

INDEX

CASE ID	AR1999026037	
SUFFIX		
RECON		
DATE BOARDED	2000224	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE	GD	
DATE OF DISCHARGE	19730723	
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY	AR635-200 CH13	
DISCHARGE REASON	A49.00	
BOARD DECISION	DENY	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.	110.00	
2.	142.00	
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.