MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:      

	BOARD DATE:                    21 September  2000
	DOCKET NUMBER:            AR2000042990

	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	
	Ms. Joyce A. Wright		Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Ms. JoAnn H. Langston		Chairperson	
	Mr. Curtis L. Greenway		Member	
	Mr. Eric N. Andersen		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 discharge under other than honorable conditions be upgraded.

APPLICANT STATES:  In effect, that his discharge was too harsh considering the nature of the offense.  In support of his application he submits a copy of his DD Form 214.

EVIDENCE OF RECORD:  The applicant's military records show he enlisted in the Florida Army National Guard (FLARNG) on 6 December 1975 as a light weapons infantryman for a period 6 years.  He was ordered to active duty for training (ADT) on 16 May 1976 and was released from ADT on 2 September 1976 and returned to control of the FLARNG.  He continued to serve in the FLARNG until he was honorably released on 7 May 1979.

He was involuntarily ordered to active duty 8 May 1979 in the Regular Army and continued to serve until he was honorably discharged on 10 July 1980 in order to reenlist.  He reenlisted on 11 July 1980.

On 3 February 1983, nonjudicial punishment (NJP) was imposed against the applicant for failure to go to his appointed place of duty.  His punishment consisted of a forfeiture of pay and 7 days extra duty.

The applicant was barred from reenlistment on 26 January 1984 for previous alcohol abuse on 25 November 1982, NJP on 3 February 1983, nonsupport of dependents and driving while intoxicated (DWI) on 8 December 1983.

On 4 May 1984, NJP was imposed against the applicant for wrongful use of marijuana.  His punishment consisted of a forfeiture of pay, oral reprimand and 
40 days extra duty.

The facts and circumstances pertaining to the applicant’s discharge are not present in the available records.  However, his DD Form 214 shows that on 10 August 1984, he was discharged under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 14, for misconduct.  He was furnished an Under Other Than Honorable Discharge Certificate.  He had a total of 5 years, 3 months and 3 days of creditable service. 

There is no evidence that the applicant applied to the Army Discharge Review Board for an upgrade of his discharge within its 15-year statute of limitations.

Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel.  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, and convictions by civil authorities.  Action will be taken to separate a member for misconduct when it is clearly established that rehabilitation is impracticable or is unlikely to succeed.  A discharge under other than honorable conditions is normally appropriate for a soldier discharged under this chapter. 

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 the absence of evidence to the contrary, it must be presumed that the applicant’s administrative separation was accomplished in compliance with applicable regulations with no procedural errors, which would tend to jeopardize his rights.  

2.  The type of separation directed and the reasons for that separation were appropriate considering all of the facts of the 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 this 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:

JHL_____  CLG____  ENA_____  GRANT

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

________  ________  ________  DENY APPLICATION

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

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2000042990	
SUFFIX		
RECON	YYYYMMDD	
DATE BOARDED	20000921	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE	UOTHC	
DATE OF DISCHARGE	19840810	
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY	AR 635-200  C, 14	
DISCHARGE REASON		
BOARD DECISION	DENY	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1. 189		
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.