MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:      

	BOARD DATE:            5 September 2002                  
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR2002073969

	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. Lee Cates		Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Ms. Celia L. Adolphi		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: In effect, that his discharge under other than honorable conditions (UOTHC) be upgraded to honorable.

APPLICANT STATES: That during his service, he was bullied and disrespected. He indicates he was told he was undesirable.  He will never be anyone.  He was told to give up the uniform, he was no longer needed in the Army.  The personnel degraded him.  It should be in the best interest to see that he gets his just treatment, because he now has a family, is a law abiding citizen and believes in his country.

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

During the period 25 January to 9 June 1980, he was a member of the Army Reserve Delayed Enlistment Program.

On 10 June 1980, he enlisted in the Regular Army for training of choice and an enlistment bonus of $2,500.00.  He completed his required training and was awarded military occupational specialty 13B (Cannon Crewman).  He was advanced to pay grade E-2, effective 1 November 1980.

On 19 November 1080, he was administered nonjudicial punishment under Article 15, Uniform Code of Military Justice for being absent without leave (AWOL) for the period 10 to 13 November 1980.  His punishment included a reduction to pay grade E-1, forfeiture of $250.00 pay per month for 2 months and confinement in the correctional custody facility for 30 days.

On 31 December 1980, he was convicted by a Summary Court-Martial of disobeying a lawful order on 13 December 1980.  His sentence included a forfeiture of $334.00 and confinement at hard labor for 30 days.

On 5 March 1981, the applicant indicated that he did not desire a separation medical examination.

On 5 March 1981, a Mental Status Evaluation cleared the applicant for separation.

He was discharged UOTHC on 17 March 1981 under Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 14, based on misconduct – an established pattern of shirking.  His records show he had 8 months and 12 days of creditable service and 63 days of lost time.

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.

Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations – Enlisted Personnel), paragraph 3-7 provides that an honorable discharge is a separation with honor.  The honorable characterization is appropriate when the quality of the member's service generally has met the standards of acceptable conduct and performance of duty for Army personnel, or is otherwise so meritorious that any other characterization would be inappropriate.

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 the absence of evidence to the contrary, the discharge proceedings were conducted in accordance with law and regulations applicable at the time. The character of the discharge is commensurate with his overall record.  

2.  His contentions have been noted; however, the type of discharge directed and the reasons therefore were appropriate considering all the facts of the case.

3.  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.

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

_cla____  __mmh___  __jtm___  DENY APPLICATION

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

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2002073969	
SUFFIX		
RECON		
DATE BOARDED	20020805	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE		
DATE OF DISCHARGE		
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY		
DISCHARGE REASON		
BOARD DECISION	DENY	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.	144	
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.