MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:       

	BOARD DATE:           6 September 2001
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR2001057069

	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 discharge (GD) be upgraded to an honorable discharge (HD).

APPLICANT STATES:  That he was not properly counseled when he was administered nonjudicial punishment (NJP) under Article 15, Uniform Code of Military Justice.

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

He enlisted in the Regular Army for 3 years on 30 June 1997.  Following completion of all required military training, he was awarded military occupational specialty (MOS) 11B, Infantryman, and sent to airborne training.  He completed airborne training and was assigned to Fort Bragg, North Carolina.

While at Fort Bragg, the applicant received a summarized NJP for violating a lawful regulation (drinking while underage).  He also received a field grade NJP for wrongful appropriation of government property (a smoke grenade).

On 14 September 1999, the applicant's unit commander notified him that he was being recommended for separation with a GD under the provisions of chapter 14, Army Regulation 635-200 for misconduct.  The applicant acknowledged notification on 6 October 1999 and declined, in writing, to consult with legal counsel.  The intermediate commander reviewed the separation packet and also recommended separation with a GD.  On 12 October 1999, the approval authority approved the recommendation and directed that the applicant be separated with a GD.

The applicant was separated with a GD on 3 November 1999.  He had 2 years, 4 months, and 4 days of creditable service and no lost time.

The applicant petitioned the Army Discharge Review Board (ADRB) seeking a discharge upgrade.  The ADRB, after considering his case on 9 May 2001, denied his request.

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, to include abuse of illegal drugs, convictions by civil authorities and desertion or absences without leave.  Action will be taken to separate a member for misconduct when it is clearly established that rehabilitation is impractical or unlikely to succeed.  Army policy states that a discharge under other than honorable conditions is normally considered appropriate, but a general discharge under honorable conditions or an honorable discharge may be granted.

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 NJPs were imposed in compliance with applicable laws, regulations and policies.  The punishments imposed were neither unjust nor disproportionate to the offenses, and there is no evidence of any substantive violation of any of the applicant's rights.  The policies and procedures governing the imposition of nonjudicial punishment are set out in Title 10, United States Code, section 815 (Article 15, UCMJ), and in Army Regulation 27-10, chapter 3.  In this case, there is no evidence of departure from those established policies or procedures.

3.  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.

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

__lls____  __mhm __  __jtm____  DENY APPLICATION

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

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2001057069	
SUFFIX		
RECON		
DATE BOARDED	20010906	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE	GD	
DATE OF DISCHARGE	19991103	
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY	AR 635-200 C14	
DISCHARGE REASON	A60.00	
BOARD DECISION	DENY	
REVIEW AUTHORITY	DIRECTOR	
ISSUES         1.	110.0000	
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.