MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:   

	BOARD DATE:            26 October 2000                  
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR2000040934

	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	
	Mrs. Joyce A. Hall		Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Ms. Melinda M. Darby 		Chairperson	
	Mr. Arthur A. Omartian		Member	
	Mr. William D. Powers		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 honorable discharge be changed to a medical discharge.

APPLICANT STATES:  In effect, that he was given a choice of getting an honorable discharge or being put in the stockade, so he took the discharge.
He further states in effect, that he should have received a medical discharge because his illness started while he was in the service.  He submits
no evidence to support his claim.

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

On 14 June 1974, the applicant enlisted in the Regular Army for 3 years.  He completed basic combat training and advanced individual training and was awarded military occupational specialty 05F (Radio Teletypewriter Operator).
The highest pay grade he achieved was pay grade E-3.

On 26 September 1974, the applicant accepted non-judicial punishment under Article 15, Uniform Code of Military Justice, for failing to go to his appointed place of duty and for being disrespectful in language towards his superior noncommissioned officer (NCO) and commissioned officers.  His imposed punishment was a forfeiture of $76.00 pay, a reduction to pay grade E-1 and 7 days extra duty.  The forfeiture and the reduction were suspended for 30 days.

On 29 July 1975, the unit commander notified the applicant that he was initiating action for separating him under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 5, Expeditious Discharge Program (EDP).  The commander cited the 
applicant’s numerous counseling concerning his attitude, lack of motivation and apparent lack of respect toward officers and NCOs, his appearance, his substandard performance, for absenting himself from duty and failing to report for duty on time on a number of occasions and subsequent relief from the position.

On 1 August 1975, the applicant acknowledged notification of the action and voluntarily consented to the discharge.  The applicant was advised by legal counsel of the basis for the contemplated separation action and the rights available to him.  He submitted a statement in his behalf.  The applicant stated in effect, that he wasn’t the sharpest soldier but he tried.  He was taught no matter how hard you try there is always someone who will pull you down.  He was told that it was his attitude but it was not.  The officers and NCOs should look at their own attitude sometimes a person’s rank will go to their head.  He tried to report the officer and the NCO but no one would listen to him because his was only a PFC.

The applicant’s medical file is missing from his record. 

On 4 August 1975, the appropriate authority approved the recommendation and directed that the applicant be discharged from the service and be issued an 
Honorable Discharge Certificate.

On 26 September 1975, the applicant was honorably discharged, in pay grade E-3, under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 5-37, EDP  He completed 1 year, 3 months and 13 days of creditable active service.

Army Regulation 635-200, sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel.  The pertinent paragraph in Chapter 5 provided that members who have demonstrated that they cannot or will not meet acceptable standards required of enlisted personnel because of poor attitude, lack of motivation, lack of self-discipline, inability to adapt socially or emotionally or failure to demonstrate promotion potential may be discharged.  It provides for the expeditious elimination of substandard, nonproductive soldiers before board or punitive action becomes necessary.  No member will be discharge under this program unless he/she voluntarily consents to the proposed discharge.  Issuance of an honorable discharge certificate is predicated upon proper military behavior and proficient performance of duty during the member’s current enlistment with due consideration for the member’s age, length of service, grade and general aptitude.  A general discharge is a separation from the Army under honorable
conditions of an individual whose military record is not sufficiently meritorious to warrant an honorable 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 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 administrative separation was accomplished in compliance with applicable regulations with no indication of procedural errors, which would tend to jeopardize his rights.  There is no evidence in the records and he has not supplied any to show he had medical problems that would have warranted medical processing.

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

__aao___  __mmd___  __wdp___  DENY APPLICATION

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

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2000040934	
SUFFIX		
RECON		
DATE BOARDED	20001026	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE	HD	
DATE OF DISCHARGE	19750926	
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY	AR635-200, Chapter 5	
DISCHARGE REASON		
BOARD DECISION	DENY	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.	110.0000	
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.