MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:       

	BOARD DATE:                  19 September 2000                  
	DOCKET NUMBER:          AR2000043033

	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			
	Ms. Joyce A. Wright		Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Mr. Hubert O. Fry, Jr.		Chairperson	
	Mr. John P. Infante		Member	
	Ms. Regan K. Smith		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 general discharge be upgraded to  honorable.

APPLICANT STATES:  That he served 2 years and 6 months and that he had an unblemished record prior to his discharge.  He also states that he received several unit commendations, the Army Achievement Medal and that he did not realize what he had done and he truly regrets it.  In support of his application he submits a copy of his DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty), a 2 March 2000 letter from the Army Review Boards Agency and several letters and certificates dated after his discharge and a reenlistment record prepared prior to his discharge from active duty.

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

The applicant enlisted on 22 September 1981 as a material control and accounting specialist.

The facts and circumstances pertaining to the applicant’s discharge processing are not present in the available records.  However, his DD Form 214 shows that on 22 March 1984, he was discharged under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 13, for unsatisfactory performance.  He was furnished a General Discharge Certificate.  He had a total of 2 years, 6 months and 1 day of active federal service.

The applicant applied to the Army Discharge Review Board (ADRB) for an upgrade of his discharge on 22 February 2000.  However, the ADRB was precluded from accepting his application due to its 15-year statute of limitations.  This Board accepted his application (DD Form 149), dated 18 May 2000.

Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the requirements and procedures for administrative discharge of enlisted personnel.  Chapter 13 of this regulation, in effect at the time, provides for separation due to unsatisfactory performance when in the commander’s judgment the individual will not become a satisfactory soldier; retention will have an adverse impact on military discipline, good order and morale; the service member will be a disruptive influence in the future; the basis for separation will continue or recur; and/or the ability of the service member to perform effectively in the future, including potential for advancement or leadership, is unlikely.  Service of soldiers separated because of unsatisfactory performance under this regulation will be characterized as honorable or under honorable conditions.

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 Board noted the applicant’s contentions that he served 2 years and 6 months and that he had an unblemished record prior to his discharge.  However, there is no evidence in the personnel records, and the applicant has provided no evidence, to show that his discharge was unjust and should be upgraded.  While the Board recognizes both the applicant’s in-service and post-service achievements, these factors alone are not sufficient as a basis to overturn the decision of the separation authority or to upgrade his discharge.

2.  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.  

3.  The type of separation directed and the reasons for that separation were appropriate considering all of the available facts of the case.

4.  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.

5.  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:

HOF____  JPI______  RKS____  GRANT

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

________  ________  ________  DENY APPLICATION

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

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2000043033	
SUFFIX		
RECON	YYYYMMDD	
DATE BOARDED	20000919	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE	GD	
DATE OF DISCHARGE	19840322	
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY	AR 635-200, C, 13	
DISCHARGE REASON		
BOARD DECISION	DENY	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.  189		
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.