MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:   

	BOARD DATE:           8 March 2000
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR1999027618

	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:

	Mr. Raymond V. O’Connor Jr.		Chairperson	
	Mr. Elzey J. Arledge Jr.		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:  That his general discharge be upgraded to honorable.

APPLICANT STATES:  That he has to go back to college and get his degree, and needs his benefits.

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

He enlisted on 26 April 1988 and, after training, was assigned to Germany.

On 11 July 1989, the applicant was administered nonjudicial punishment (NJP) under Article 15, UCMJ, for failure to report to his appointed place of duty.

On 11 January 1990, he was administered NJP for failure to obey a lawful order, and being disrespectful in language toward a superior NCO.

On 29 January 1990, the applicant’s commander recommended he be discharged for misconduct under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 14.  The applicant consulted with counsel and declined to submit a statement in his own behalf.  He acknowledged that he might expect to encounter substantial prejudice in civilian life if he was issued a general discharge under honorable conditions.  On 30 January 1990, the separation authority approved the recommendation and directed the applicant be issued a General Discharge Certificate.

The applicant was discharged on 21 February 1990 at Fort Dix, New Jersey.  He had 1 year, 9 months and 26 days of creditable service.

Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel.  Essentially, it states an honorable discharge is a separation with honor, and is appropriate when the quality of the soldier’s service is so meritorious that any other characterization would be clearly inappropriate.  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, convictions by civil authorities, desertion or absence without leave.  Action will be taken to separate a member for misconduct when it is clearly established that rehabilitation is impracticable or is unlikely to succeed.

On 30 June 1999, the Army Discharge Review Board, in a unanimous decision, denied the applicant’s request for upgrade of his 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.  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

__rvo___  __ela____  __ewl___  DENY APPLICATION

						Karl F. Schneider
						Director, Army Review Boards Agency

INDEX

CASE ID	AR1999027618	
SUFFIX		
RECON		
DATE BOARDED	20000308	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE	GD	
DATE OF DISCHARGE	19900221	
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY	AR635-200 CH14	
DISCHARGE REASON	A67.00	
BOARD DECISION	DENY	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.	110.00	
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.