MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF: 

	BOARD DATE:           12 April 2000
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR2000036608

	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. McKim-Spilker		Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Mr. Robert G. Hinkle		Chairperson	
	Ms. Barbara J. Ellis		Member	
	Mr. James P. Stueve		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 undesirable discharge (UD) be upgraded to general, under honorable conditions (GD).

APPLICANT STATES:  In effect, that he performed all tasks required while on active duty and that the misconduct occurred while he was in leave status; and, that he seeks an upgrade in order to obtain medical benefits. 

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

On 6 August 1969 he enlisted in the Regular Army for a period of 3 years.  He successfully completed basic combat training at Fort Leonard Wood, Missouri.  He failed to complete advanced individual training due to two periods of AWOL.

The applicant’s record documents that the highest permanent rank he held on active duty was private/E-1 and the record contains no documented acts of valor, achievement, or service warranting special recognition.

On 5 November 1969 he accepted nonjudicial punishment (NJP) under the provisions of Article 15, UCMJ, for violation of Article 86.  The punishment imposed consisted of forfeiture of $26.

On 13 January 1970 the applicant departed AWOL.

On 16 January 1970 the applicant was charged by civilian authorities in Rolla, Missouri, with burglary in the second degree and stealing.  He was confined by local authorities.

On 3 March 1970 the applicant was tried by jury and found guilty of burglary and stealing.  He was sentenced to serve two years for each count to run consecutively.

On 4 May 1970 the unit commander recommended the applicant’s discharge under the provisions of AR 635-206 due to a civilian conviction with an undesirable discharge.  The applicant was advised of his rights and indicated that he did not intend to appeal his civilian conviction.  Accordingly, on 26 May 1970 the applicant was discharged.  He was credited with 5 months and 9 days active military service, and 133 days lost time. 

Army Regulation 635-206, in effect at the time, set forth the basic authority for the administrative separation of enlisted personnel who had committed an act or acts of misconduct (i.e., fraudulent entry, conviction by civil authorities, AWOL, and desertion).  A UD was normally considered appropriate.

On 23 June 1983 the applicant’s request for an upgrade was denied by the Army Discharge Review Board. 

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 record does not support the applicant’s contentions, and no evidence has been submitted by the applicant to support his contentions that he performed the military duties requested of him.  The record shows that he failed to complete AIT because he was AWOL on two occasions, and that while in AWOL status, was arrested and confined by civilian authorities.

2.  The discharge proceedings were conducted in accordance with law and regulations applicable at the time.  He was discharged under the provisions of AR 635-206 for his conviction by civilian authorities for second degree burglary and stealing.  A UD was normally considered appropriate. 

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 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

___rgh___  ___bje__  ___jps___  DENY APPLICATION

Karl F. Schneider
Director, Army Review Boards Agency

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2000036608	
SUFFIX		
RECON		
DATE BOARDED	20000412	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE	UD	
DATE OF DISCHARGE	19700526	
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY	AR 635-206	
DISCHARGE REASON	6100	
BOARD DECISION	DENY	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1. 9217		
2. 9235		
3. 9445		
4. 0100		
5. 		
6.