MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:   

	BOARD DATE:           24 August 2000
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR2000039136

	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. Robert J. McGowan		Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Mr. George D. Paxson 		Chairperson	
	Mr. Curtis L. Greenway 		Member	
	Mr. Allen L. Raub 		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 (GD) be upgraded to an Honorable Discharge (HD).

APPLICANT STATES:  The applicant makes no statement, nor provides any supporting documentation.

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

He enlisted in the Regular Army for 3 years and 14 weeks on 29 August 1989.  Following training, he was awarded military occupational specialty 11B (Infantryman), and assigned to Company B, 4/27th Infantry, Schofield Barracks, Hawaii.

The applicant served with his unit in Southwest Asia in Operation Desert Storm.  He was awarded the Army Achievement Medal, National Defense Service Medal, Southwest Asia Service Medal with Bronze Service Star, Kuwait Liberation Medal, Army Service Ribbon, Overseas Service Ribbon, and the Combat Infantryman Badge.

The applicant has a long record of negative counseling statements for disrespect, failure to repair, disobedience, driving on a suspended license, etc..  He has one nonjudicial punishment (NJP) under Article 15, Uniform Code of Military Justice, for disobedience.  On 12 March 1992, his commander notified him that he was initiating separation action under chapter 13, Army Regulation 635-200 for unsatisfactory performance.  The applicant acknowledged notification, consulted with legal counsel, and was advised of the impact of a GD.  He elected not to make a statement in his own behalf.  Further rehabilitative efforts were waived and, on 13 March 1992, the separation authority directed discharge with a GD.

The applicant was discharged on 1 April 1992.  He had 2 years, 7 months, and 3 days of creditable service.

The applicant petitioned the Army Discharge Review Board (ADRB) seeking a discharge upgrade.  The ADRB, after considering his case on 15 March 2000, denied his request.

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.  Army policy states that a general discharge, under honorable conditions is normally considered appropriate, but an honorable discharge may be granted in meritorious cases.
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 this requirement.

2.  The applicant's unsatisfactory performance, disobedience, and generally poor attitude toward the military are well documented and completely justify the administrative separation action taken against him.

3.  The applicant’s discharge proceedings were conducted in accordance with law and regulations applicable at the time.  The character of the discharge is commensurate with the applicant's overall record of military service.

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:

__gdp___  __clg____  __alr ___  GRANT

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

________  ________  ________  DENY APPLICATION

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

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2000039136	
SUFFIX		
RECON		
DATE BOARDED	20000824	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE	GD	
DATE OF DISCHARGE	19920401	
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY	AR 635-200 C13	
DISCHARGE REASON	A27.00	
BOARD DECISION	DENY	
REVIEW AUTHORITY	DIRECTOR	
ISSUES         1.	110.0000	
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.