MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:       

	BOARD DATE:            6 September 2001
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR2001054116

	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	
	Mr. Robert J. McGowan		Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Mr. Luther L. Santiful		Chairperson	
	Mr. Melvin H. Meyer		Member	
	Mr. John T. Meixell		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 (GD) be upgraded to an honorable discharge (HD).

APPLICANT STATES:  That his discharge is unjust.  He states that he enlisted in the Army for training and did not get it.  When he went to the Inspector General, he was told that he could stay in the Army and get the training he was promised or he could take an HD.  He chose the HD.  He adds that he did not know of the problem with his discharge until he applied for a handgun permit.

COUNSEL CONTENDS:  Counsel makes no statement.

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

He enlisted in the Regular Army for 3 years on 13 May 1971 for airborne training. Following completion of Basic Combat Training (BCT) at Fort Dix, New Jersey, he was transferred to Fort Polk, Louisiana, for Advanced Individual Training (AIT) in military occupational specialty (MOS) 11H (Heavy Weapons Infantryman).  He missed a substantial portion of his AIT due to an emergency leave and a hospitalization and was recommended for recycle to another AIT class in the same MOS.

While at Fort Polk, the applicant accepted nonjudicial punishment (NJP) under Article 15, Uniform Code of Military Justice, for failing to go at the time prescribed to his appointed place of duty.  As punishment, he was reduced from private/E-2 to private/E-1, given 14 days' restriction, and ordered to perform 14 days of extra duty.

On 16 September 1971, the applicant's commander notified him that he was being recommended for elimination from the Army under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-212 for unsuitability.  A record of counseling showed that from 1 August 1971 to 15 September 1971, he had been counseled 9 times, once by a second lieutenant, 6 times by a captain, and twice by a lieutenant colonel.  The applicant acknowledged notification on 16 September 1971, waived all rights, and did not submit a statement in his own behalf.  He acknowledged that he could expect to encounter substantial prejudice in civilian life if given a GD.

On 30 September 1971, the approving authority approved the applicant's separation for unsuitability and directed issuance of a GD.  On 8 October 1971, the applicant was discharged with a GD, under the provisions of AR 635-212, for unsuitability.  At the time of discharge, the applicant had 4 months and 26 days of creditable service and no lost time.

There is no record of the applicant petitioning the Army Discharge Review Board (ADRB) for a discharge upgrade within that board's 15-year statute of limitations.

Army Regulation 635-212, in effect at the time, set forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel who were found to be unfit or unsuitable for military service.  The regulation further provided, in pertinent part, that service members discharged for unfitness would be furnished an undesirable discharge unless circumstances warranted a general or honorable discharge.  Service members discharged for unsuitability would be furnished an honorable or general 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 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.  The record does not substantiate the applicant's contention that he was denied any training for which he had enlisted.  His enlistment contract called for him to undergo airborne training; this would have occurred following completion of AIT.  The applicant did not complete his AIT because he missed too much training; however, his commander recommended that he be recycled into the next available starting class.

4.  There is no evidence in the record, nor has the applicant provided any, to show that he registered a complaint with the IG or that the IG conducted an investigation into the matter of the applicant's training.

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:

________  ________  ________ GRANT

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

__LLS___  __MHM_  __JTM___  DENY APPLICATION

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

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2001054116	
SUFFIX		
RECON		
DATE BOARDED	20010906	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE	GD	
DATE OF DISCHARGE	19711008	
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY	AR 635-212	
DISCHARGE REASON	A40.00	
BOARD DECISION	DENY	
REVIEW AUTHORITY	DIRECTOR	
ISSUES         1.	110.0000	
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.