MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:       

	BOARD DATE:            17 September 2002
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR2002073141

	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. Jessie B. Strickland		Analyst	

The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Mr. Elzey J. Arledge, Jr.		Chairperson	
	Mr. Thomas B. Redfern, III		Member	
	Ms. Karen A. Heinz		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:  The applicant has offered no evidence or argument in support of his application for an upgrade of his discharge.

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

He enlisted in Omaha, Nebraska, on 7 June 1976, for a period of 4 years, training as an infantryman and assignment to the Berlin Brigade.  He successfully completed his training and received assignment instructions to the Berlin Brigade in Germany.  However, prior to his departure, he was accepted for assignment to the 3rd Infantry (Old Guard) at Fort Myer, Virginia.  He waived his enlistment commitment and was transferred to Fort Myer on 4 December 1976.

On 9 March 1977, he stole three tires off of a fellow soldier’s car and nonjudicial punishment (NJP) was imposed against him for the offense.  His punishment consisted of extra duty and restriction.

He was advanced to the pay grade of E-3 on 7 June 1977 and to the pay grade of E-4 on 2 December 1977.

On 27 July 1978, NJP was imposed against him for being insubordinate and disrespectful in language towards a senior noncommissioned officer (NCO).  His punishment consisted of a reduction to the pay grade of E-3 (suspended for 90 days), a forfeiture of pay and extra duty.  

The applicant attended the Primary NCO Course at the NCO Academy at Fort Knox, Kentucky, on 6 October 1978 and was dismissed from the course on the first day, for conduct inconsistent with the requirements of leadership.  The applicant was found to have in his possession three ounces of marijuana and drug paraphernalia (two pipes) containing marijuana residue.  He was returned to Fort Myer on 11 October and on 13 October 1978, the suspended portion of his punishment for the NJP imposed on 27 July 1978 was vacated and he was reduced to the pay grade of E-3.

On 3 November 1978, NJP was imposed against him for the drug offense and his punishment consisted of a reduction to the pay grade of E-2, a forfeiture of pay and extra duty.

On 9 January 1979, the applicant’s commander initiated action to separate the applicant from the service under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 5-31 and the Expeditious Discharge Program (EDP).  He cited as the basis for his recommendation the applicant’s inability to adapt emotionally to military life and his lack of self discipline.  He informed the applicant of his rights, to include his right to decline the discharge.
After being afforded the opportunity to consult with counsel, the applicant voluntarily consented to accept a discharge under the EDP and elected not to submit a statement in his own behalf.

The appropriate authority approved the recommendation for discharge on 22 January 1979 and directed that he be furnished a General Discharge Certificate.

Accordingly, he was discharged under honorable condition on 26 January 1979, under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 5-31 and the EDP.  He had served 2 years, 7 months and 20 days of total active service.

There is no evidence in the available records to show that he ever applied to the Army Discharge Review Board for an upgrade of his discharge within that board’s 15-year statute of limitations.

The Department of the Army began testing the Expeditious Discharge Program (EDP) in October 1973.  In a message dated 8 November 1974 the Deputy Chief of Staff for Personnel announced the expansion of the EDP.  The program provided for the separation of soldiers whose acceptability, performance of duty, and/or potential for continued effective service fall below the standards required for retention in the Army.  Soldiers may be separated under this program when subjective evaluation of their commanders identifies them as lacking qualities for continued military service because of attitude, motivation, self-discipline, inability to adapt socially or emotionally, or failure to demonstrate promotion potential.  Soldiers had to consent to separation under this program in order for commanders to separate them under the provisions of the EDP.  Otherwise, a commander was required to separate soldiers under other provisions of the regulation, which in most cases resulted in a discharge under other than honorable conditions.  There have never been any automatic provisions to upgrade such a 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.  The applicant’s administrative discharge was accomplished in accordance with applicable regulations with no violations of any of the applicant’s rights.  Accordingly, the applicant’s discharge and the reasons therefor were appropriate under the circumstances.

2.  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. 

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

__eja____  __kh____  __tbr____  DENY APPLICATION

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

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2002073141	
SUFFIX		
RECON	YYYYMMDD	
DATE BOARDED	2002/09/17	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE	GD	
DATE OF DISCHARGE	1979/01/26	
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY	AR635-200/CH5	
DISCHARGE REASON	EDP	
BOARD DECISION	DENY	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.  488	144.2400/A24.00	
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.