MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:  

	BOARD DATE:  29 August 2002
	DOCKET NUMBER:  AR2002069975

	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. Joyce A. Wright		Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Ms. Margaret K. Patterson		Chairperson	
	Mr. Harry B. Oberg		Member	
	Mr. Christopher J. Prosser		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 be upgraded to honorable.

APPLICANT STATES:  In effect, that his background, nature of his character, and positive mind set supports an upgrade of his discharge from general to honorable.  In support of his application, he submits a copy of:  his DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty); his resume; a letter of support from his guidance counselor; four letters of support from his ministry; a certificate of ordination, commission, and recognition; and a personal letter of appeal.  

EVIDENCE OF RECORD:  The applicant's military records show he enlisted on 2 January 1979.

Between January 1979 and December 1980, he was punished on four occasions under Article 15, Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ), for failure to go to his appointed place of duty on two occasions, failure to obey a lawful order on four occasions, disrespectful in language, violation of a lawful general regulation, for being absent from his appointed place of duty, and for wrongfully using reproachful words.  His punishments consisted of forfeitures of pay, restrictions, extra duties, and reduction to pay grade E-1.

The applicant underwent a separation medical examination on 8 January  
1981, and was found qualified for separation.  

The applicant underwent a mental status evaluation, which determined that he could distinguish right from wrong and that he possessed sufficient mental capacity to participate in administrative or judicial proceedings.

The applicant had a bar to reenlistment imposed on 14 January 1981.

On 9 February 1981, the applicant's commander recommended that the applicant be eliminated from the service under the provisions of Army Regulation, 
635-200, chapter 13, paragraph 13-4c, for unsuitability.  The commander's recommendation was based on apathy, (lack of appropriate interest), defective attitude, and his inability to expend efforts constructively.  

After consulting with counsel, the applicant requested a personal appearance and consideration of his case by a board of officers.

The applicant appeared before a board of officers on 1 April 1981, was represented by counsel, and was present during all open sessions of the board.
The board of officers recommended that the applicant be discharged under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 13, paragraph 13-4c, due to apathy, defective attitudes, and inability to expend efforts constructively.  
The appropriate authority approved the findings and recommendations of the board of officers on 13 April 1981.

The applicant was discharged on 4 May 1981, under the provisions of 
AR 635-200, chapter 13, paragraph 13-4c, for unsuitability.  He was issued a General Discharge Certificate.  He had a total of 2 years, 4 months, and 3 days of creditable service.

The letters of support and certificates provided by the applicant attest to his good standing with his ministries as a faithful member and ordained minister.

There is no evidence that the applicant applied to the Army Discharge Review
Board for an upgrade of his discharge within its 15-year statute of limitations.

Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the requirements and procedures for the administrative discharge of enlisted personnel.  Chapter 13, in effect at that time, applied to separation for unfitness and unsuitability.  At that time, paragraph
13-4c provided for the separation of individuals for unsuitability whose record evidenced apathy (lack of appropriate interest), defective attitudes, and an inability to expend effort constructively.  When separation for unsuitability was warranted an honorable or general discharge was issued as determined by the separation authority based upon the individual’s entire record.

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 notes the applicant’s contentions that his background, nature of his character, and positive mind set supports an upgrade of discharge; however, there is no evidence in the available records, and the applicant has provided no evidence, to show that his discharge was in error or unjust and should be upgraded.

2.  The applicant's administrative separation was accomplished in compliance with applicable regulations with no indication of procedural errors which would tend to jeopardize his rights.

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

4.  The Board notes the applicant's letters of support and certificates pertaining to his post service accomplishments in the ministry; however, this evidence is not sufficient on its own to warrant an upgrade of his discharge.

5.  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.

6.  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

__mp___  __ho___  ___cp_____  DENY APPLICATION

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

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2002069975	
SUFFIX		
RECON		
DATE BOARDED	20020829	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE	GD	
DATE OF DISCHARGE	19810504	
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY	AR .635-200, CHAP 13-4C	
DISCHARGE REASON		
BOARD DECISION	DENY	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.  360		
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.