MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:       

	BOARD DATE:            25 May 2000
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR2000036095

	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. Carl W. S. Chun		Director	
	Mr. Joseph A. Adriance		Analyst	

The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Mr. Elzey J. Arledge, Jr.		Chairperson	
	Mr. Ernest W. Lutz, Jr.		Member	
	Mr. Kenneth L. Wright		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 discharge be upgraded from a general, under honorable conditions discharge (GD) to an honorable discharge (HD). 

APPLICANT STATES:  In effect, that his character was assassinated as a result of racial discrimination.  He further states that he served proudly and diligently and was very much a career oriented soldier prior to being racially discriminated against.  

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

The applicant’s military records were not available to the Board for review and the applicant submitted no documentation in support of his contentions.  There was a DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge From Active Duty) which documents the character and reason for the applicant’s discharge.

The DD Form 214 shows that the applicant was separated on 20 April 1980, after completing 3 years, 7 months, and 1 day of service on his current enlistment and a total of 6 years, 4 months, and 1 day of total active military service.  This document also verifies that the applicant was separated, under the provisions of chapter 13, Army Regulation 635-200, by reason of unsatisfactory performance.  His service was characterized as under honorable conditions and he received a GD.

The DD Form 214 issued to the applicant upon his discharge, on 20 April 1983, contains his signature authenticating the document.  In addition, there is no evidence that the applicant contested the separation action at the time or that he raised the issue of racial discrimination in connection with the discharge process at that time.

There is no evidence to show that the applicant applied to the Army Discharge Review Board (ADRB), for an upgrade to his discharge, within the 15 year statute of limitations.

Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel.  Chapter 13 contains the policy and outlines the procedures for separating individuals for unsatisfactory performance, and provides, in pertinent part, that commanders will separate a member under this chapter when, in the commander's judgment, the member will not develop sufficiently to participate satisfactorily in further training and/or become a satisfactory soldier. 

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 record is void of facts and circumstances concerning the specific events that led to his discharge from the Army.  The Board noted that his record does contain a properly constituted DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty), signed by the applicant.  This document identifies the reason and characterization of the discharge and the Board presumed government regularity in the discharge process.  

2.  The Board noted the applicant’s contention that he was the subject of racial discrimination that led to his character assassination.  However, the Board found this claim was not supported by either evidence or record or independent evidence submitted by the applicant.  Therefore, lacking evidence to support the applicant’s claim of racial discrimination, the Board found no basis for relief in this case.  

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

___ewl __  __klw ___  __eja ___  DENY APPLICATION

		    Carl W. S. Chun
		    Director, Army Board for Correction
    of Military Records

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2000036095	
SUFFIX		
RECON		
DATE BOARDED	2000/05/25	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE	GD	
DATE OF DISCHARGE	1983/04/20	
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY	AR 635-200 C13	
DISCHARGE REASON	Unsatisfactory Performance	
BOARD DECISION	DENY	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1. 189	110.0000	
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.