MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:        

	BOARD DATE:            27 January 2000
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR1999026802

	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. Jessie B. Strickland		Analyst	

The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Ms. Irene N. Wheelwright		Chairperson	
	Mr. Stanley Kelley		Member	
	Mr. Elzey J. Arledge, 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:  That his general discharge issued on 9 November 1973 be upgraded to honorable and that he be issued a reentry (RE) code of RE1.

APPLICANT STATES:  In effect, that he did not receive an administrative (chapter) discharge, that he had no record of nonjudicial punishment, that he was not flagged and that he should have received an honorable discharge for his service.

EVIDENCE OF RECORD:  The applicant's military records, though incomplete, show:

The applicant enlisted in San Antonio, Texas on 31 July 1973 and served until he was discharged under honorable conditions at Fort Polk, Louisiana on 9 November 1973, under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 5, for unsuitability, apathy, defective attitudes and inability to expend effort constructively.  He had served 4 months and 2 days of total active service and had 7 days of lost time due to AWOL.  He was still in a trainee status.

There is no evidence in the available records to show that he ever applied to the Army Discharge Review Board for an upgrade of his discharge within that board’s 15-year statute of limitations.

The applicant again enlisted in Dallas, Texas on 29 August 1975 for a period of 4 years and a cash bonus.  He was transferred to Fort Knox, Kentucky.  While assigned to the reception station he went AWOL and on 31 October 1975, using a false identity, he enlisted in Los Angeles, California in the pay grade of E-3 for a period of 3 years.  He then went AWOL on 7 November 1975 from the reception station at Fort Jackson, South Carolina and remained absent until he was apprehended by civil authorities on 31 December 1975, was convicted, and was sentenced to 5 years in a Federal institution in California.

On 24 May 1977 he was discharged under honorable conditions under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-206 for misconduct based on conviction by civil authorities.  He had 6 days of total active service and 628 days of lost time due to AWOL and confinement by civil authorities.  He was released on parole on 9 May 1978.

On 4 March 1980 he again enlisted in San Antonio, Texas in the pay grade of   E-3 for a period of 3 years.  He indicated at the time of his enlistment that he had no prior military service.  He was transferred to Fort Jackson to undergo his training and went AWOL on 2 June 1980.  He remained absent until he was apprehended by civil authorities on 2 July 1980 for violation of his parole.  He was incarcerated in a Federal Institution in Texarcana, Texas.

On 29 May 1981 the applicant’s service and enlistment contract was voided under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 14, due to misconduct by reason of fraudulent enlistment.

Documents contained in his Official Military Personnel File indicate that during the course of investigations that ensued, it was discovered that the applicant also had an Air Force file and that he was found in possession of several altered documents which included reports of separation (DD Form 214), enlistment contracts, and travel orders.

Army Regulation 635-200, in effect at the time, set forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel.  Chapter 5 of that regulation provided authorization for the separation of personnel who failed to demonstrate potential and meet an acceptable standard for retention. A general discharge was normally issued.  Under today’s standards, a person in a trainee status with less than 180 days of active service would receive an uncharacterized discharge.

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 to the contrary, it must be presumed that the applicant’s administrative discharge was accomplished in conformance with applicable regulations with no violations of any of his rights.

2.  Accordingly, it appears that the type of discharge directed and the reasons therefore were appropriate under the circumstances.

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.  The applicant’s contentions have been noted by the Board and are not supported either by evidence submitted with his application or the evidence of record.   

5.  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

___sk___  __eja ___  __inw ___  DENY APPLICATION

						Karl F. Schneider
						Director, Army Review Boards Agency

INDEX

CASE ID	AR1999026800	
SUFFIX		
RECON		
DATE BOARDED	2000/01/27	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE	GD	
DATE OF DISCHARGE	1981/05/29	
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY	AR 635-200, CH5	
DISCHARGE REASON	503	
BOARD DECISION	DENY	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.  503 	144.2500/A25.00/TDP	
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.