MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:  

	BOARD DATE:           23 February 2000                        
	DOCKET NUMBER:  AR1999026562

	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.

	Ms. Rosa M. Chandler		Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Mr. Raymond V. O’Connor Jr. 		Chairperson	
	Ms. Elizabeth Buchanon 		Member	
	Mr. Raymond J. Wagner		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 general discharge under honorable conditions be upgraded to a fully honorable discharge (HD).

APPLICANT STATES:  That he believes that his discharge should be upgraded as a result of a mental condition that he had at the time of his separation.

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

He enlisted in the Regular Army on 7 March 1973 for 3 years and training in military occupational specialty (MOS) 64C (Motor Transport Operator).  On 
13 May 1973, he was assigned to Germany.

On 26 October 1973, the applicant accepted nonjudicial punishment (NJP) under the provisions of Article 15, Uniform Code of Military Justice, for being absent without leave (AWOL) from his place of duty from 16-17 October 1973.  His punishment included 7 days restriction and 7 days extra duty.

On 23 November 1973, he accepted NJP for failure to go to his appointed place of duty at the prescribed time respectively on 13, 14, and on 15 November 1973. His punishment included reduction from pay grade E-2 to pay grade E-1, forfeiture of pay and extra duty.

Additional evidence in his available records indicates that his motor sergeant, the company first sergeant, and the company commander all counseled the applicant about his poor performance and his negative attitude.  He was counseled a total of 14 times.  He was counseled both verbally and in writing and he was given two inter-battalion rehabilitative transfers.  The counseling statements are not a matter of record. 

On 23 November 1973, the applicant underwent a mental status evaluation.  He was diagnosed to have a clear thinking process, normal thought content, a good memory, and to have no significant mental illness.  He was also diagnosed to be mentally responsible and able to distinguish right from wrong and to adhere to the right.  Additionally, he was determined to have the mental capacity to understand and participate in board proceedings and he met medical retention standards in accordance with chapter 3, Army Regulation 40-501.

On 31 January 1974, the commander officially notified the applicant that he was being recommended for discharge with a GD under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, in accordance with the Department of the Army Letter (DAPE-MPE-PS), dated 20 August 1973, Subject: The Expeditious Discharge Program (EDP).  The commander cited the applicant's NJP’s, his continued misconduct, his failure to respond to counseling, his apathetic performance, his negative attitude and his expressed desire not to remain in the service as the basis for his recommendation.

On an unknown date, the applicant acknowledged notification of the commander’s intent to separate him and voluntarily accepted discharge from the service.  He stated that he understood the ramifications of receiving a less than fully honorable discharge.  He also declined to submit a statement in his own behalf. 

On 24 April 1974, the appropriate authority approved the recommendation separation and directed the issuance of a GD. 

On 6 May 1974, the applicant authenticated a statement in which he indicated that his medical condition had not changed since his separation medical examination, which was given on an unknown date.

On 6 May 1974, the applicant was discharged under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200 and DA Letter (DAPE-MPE-PS) 20 August 1973, under the EDP with a GD.  He had completed 1 year and 2 months of creditable active military service.

DA Letter (DAPE-MPE-PS) 20 August 1973, states that soldiers will be separated under the EDP for unsuitability as a result of one or more of the following conditions: for inaptitude, character and behavior disorders, apathy, or alcoholism.  The soldier must voluntarily accept discharge from the service and he must also acknowledge that he understands that he may receive a GD and encounter substantial prejudice in civilian life.

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 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.

2.  The discharge proceedings were conducted in accordance with law and regulations applicable at the time.  Both the characterization of service and the narrative reason for separation are commensurate with the applicant’s overall record of military service.

3.  Just months prior to his discharge, he was found to have no mental disease that would have impaired his ability to perform his military duties.  On the very same day that he was separated, he authenticated a statement with his own signature in which he indicated that his medical condition had not changed.  He has provided no probative evidence to the contrary.

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

__rvo___  ___eb___  ___rjw___  DENY APPLICATION

   Karl F. Schneider
   Director, Army Review Boards Agency

INDEX

CASE ID	AR1999026562	
SUFFIX		
RECON		
DATE BOARDED	20000223	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE	(GD)	
DATE OF DISCHARGE	19740506	
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY	AR 635-200 	
DISCHARGE REASON	A40.00	
BOARD DECISION	Deny	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.	144.4000	
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.