MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:   

	BOARD DATE:           27 February 2001                   
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR2000047578

	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:

	Mr. John N. Slone		Chairperson	
	Mr. Melvin H. Meyer		Member	
	Mr. Roger W. Able		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:  In effect, that he went to the doctor because he was having hallucinations and was paranoid.  He was discharged under the wrong chapter 13, it was obvious that his discharge should have been for psychiatric reasons.

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

On 1 October 1975, at the age of 19 the applicant enlisted in the Army for 
3 years.  He completed basic combat training and advanced individual training and was awarded military occupational specialty 11B10 (Infantryman).  The highest pay grade he achieved was pay grade E-2.

The applicant’s DA Form 2-1 (Personnel Qualification Record) shows that he departed in February 1976, for assignment in Hawaii with the Combat Support Company, 1st Battalion, 35th Infantry, 25th Infantry Division.

Between 8 April and 10 October 1976, the applicant was counseled on six different occasions for poor performance, being out of uniform, missing formation and for failure to repair.  

On 4 November 1976, the applicant accepted nonjudicial punishment (NJP) under Article 15, Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) for failure to repair.  His imposed punishment was a reduction to pay grade E-2 (suspended for 
60 days), 14 days extra duty not to exceed 2 hours per day.

Between 8 and 16 November 1976, the applicant was counseled and received oral reprimands on three different occasions for missing formation.

On 24 November 1976, the applicant accepted an NJP for failure to repair.  
His imposed punishment was a reduction to pay grade E-1, a forfeiture of 
$87.00 pay, 14 days extra duty and restriction.

Between 6 January and 13 January 1977, the applicant was counseled on three different occasions for missing formation.  

On 21 January 1977, the applicant accepted an NJP for two occasions of disobeying a lawful order from his superior noncommissioned officer for failure to repair.  His imposed punishment was a forfeiture of $50.00 pay for 1 month and 14 days extra duty.

On 1 February 1977, the commander notified the applicant that he was being recommended for discharge under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 13, for unsuitability (apathy, defective attitudes and inability to expend effort constructively). 

The applicant underwent a medical examination, which found him fit for separation.  He waived his rights to a mental evaluation.

The applicant was advised by legal counsel of the basis for the contemplated separation action and the rights available to him, he waived consideration, personal appearance, and representation before a board of officers.  He was afforded the opportunity to submit statements in his own behalf, but declined to do so. 

On 3 February 1977, the applicant received notification to appear before a board of officers for the purpose of determining whether he should be discharged before the expiration of his term of service.  The record indicates that the applicant did not appear before a board of officers, he waived his rights to appear on an earlier date.

On 18 February 1977, the appropriate authority waived further counseling and rehabilitation requirements and approved the discharge recommendation and directed the issuance of a General Discharge Certificate.  On 28 February 1977, the applicant was discharged under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 13, for unsatisfactory performance with a general discharge.  He completed 1 year, 5 months and 12 days of creditable active service proved the recommendation.

Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel.  Chapter 13 of that regulation provides, in pertinent part, that a member may be separated when it is determined that he or she is unqualified for further military service because of unsatisfactory performance.  Commanders will separate a soldier for unsatisfactory performance when it is clearly established that, in the commander’s judgment, the soldier will not develop sufficiently to participate satisfactorily in further training and/or become a satisfactory soldier.

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 evidence of record shows that the applicant’s discharge was based on his unsatisfactory duty performance.  There is no evidence in the applicant’s record that substantiates his allegation of psychiatric problems.  In fact, he waived his rights to a psychiatric evaluation.  The applicant also made a statement on his medical report that he was in good health.

3.  Therefore the type of discharge directed and the reasons for separation were appropriate considering all the facts of the case.

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

__jns___  __mhm___  __rwa___  DENY APPLICATION

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

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2000047578	
SUFFIX		
RECON		
DATE BOARDED	20010227	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE	GD	
DATE OF DISCHARGE	19770228	
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY	AR635-200, Chapter 13 .  .  .  .  .  	
DISCHARGE REASON	A40.00	
BOARD DECISION	DENY	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.	144.4000	
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.