MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:     

	BOARD DATE:           28 June 2001                   
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR20001051726

	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. Carolyn G. Wade		Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Ms. Jennifer L. Prater		Chairperson	
	Mr. John E. Denning		Member	
	Ms. Paula Mokulis		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, under honorable conditions discharge be upgraded to honorable.

APPLICANT STATES:  In effect, that there is no error or injustice and that he just wants his discharge upgraded to honorable.

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

He enlisted in the Regular Army (RA) on 6 October 1994 for a period of 3 years and 26 weeks and for the United States Army Training Enlistment Option, military occupational specialty (MOS) 63B, Light Wheel Vehicle Mechanic – Airborne.  Following completion of all military training, the applicant was awarded MOS 63B and was assigned to Fort Bragg, North Carolina.

On 5 February 1997, the applicant accepted a summarized NJP (nonjudicial punishment) under the provisions of Article 15, Uniform Code of Military Justice, for being disrespectful in deportment toward a superior noncommissioned officer. His punishment consisted of 14 days of extra duty.

On 17 March 1997, a serous incident report was filed in reference to the applicant operating an unregistered vehicle and allowing another soldier to drive the vehicle and this soldier having an accident.

On 30 July 1997, another serious incident report was filed in reference to the applicant assaulting a fellow soldier with a deadly weapon and thereafter threatening to kill him.

On 6 June 1997, the unit commander notified the applicant of his intent to initiate a bar to reenlistment and an administrative separation action under the provisions of chapter 14, Army Regulation (AR) 635-200, for misconduct.

On 11 June 1997, the bar to reenlistment was approved and, on 12 June 1997, the applicant elected not to appeal the bar.

On 15 August 1997, the unit commander recommended the applicant be separated with a GD under the provisions of chapter 14, AR 635-200 for a pattern of misconduct.  

On 20 August 1997, the appropriate authority approved the applicant’s discharge from the Army with a GD.  Accordingly, on 5 September 1997, the applicant was discharged after completing 2 years and 11 months of creditable military service.

On 12 January 2001, the Army Discharge Review Board denied the applicant’s request for an upgrade of his discharge. 

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, convictions by civil authorities, desertion or absence without leave.  Action will be taken to separate a member for misconduct when it is clearly established that rehabilitation is impracticable or is unlikely to succeed.

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.  To the contrary, he stated on his DD Form 149, Application for Correction of Military Records, that there was no error or injustice in his records.

2.  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.

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

_jlp_____  __jed ___  ___pm___  DENY APPLICATION

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

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2001051726	
SUFFIX		
RECON		
DATE BOARDED	20010628	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE	GD	
DATE OF DISCHARGE	19970905	
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY	AR 635-200, c14	
DISCHARGE REASON	Misconduct	
BOARD DECISION	DENY	
REVIEW AUTHORITY	Director	
ISSUES         1.	144.6750	
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.