MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:   

	BOARD DATE:           4 February 2003                  
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR2002074328

	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. G. E. Vandenberg		Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Mr. Melvin H. Meyer		Chairperson	
	Mr. Curtis L. Greenway		Member	
	Mr. Ronald J. Weaver		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, he entered the service under a two-year obligated service "Buddy" program, which was not honored.  When he attempted to have this honored and it was denied, he "acted out in order to force the issue." He would like to have his discharge upgraded so that his father will be proud of him.

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

On 14 January 1971, the applicant's parents signed a DD Form 373 (Consent, Declaration of Parent or Legal Guardian) for the applicant to enlist for three years as an underage inductee.  The only enlistment option of record was for training, if otherwise qualified, in the military occupation specialty (MOS) career group 11, Armor Crewman.  His enlistment contract (DD Form 4) again lists a three-year obligation with the only enlistment option as MOS training.
 
The applicant entered active duty on 16 February 1971, at age 17.  He completed basic combat training and advanced individual training without incident.  He was assigned to Germany as an 11E (truck driver).

The applicant received nonjudicial punishment (NJP) under Article 15, Uniform Code of Military Justice on seven occasions with a total of 13 specifications: failure to go to his appointed place of duty (5 times); violation of a general order (5 times); being absent without leave (AWOL) (2 times); and dereliction of duty by sleeping on duty.

On 26 July 1972, a bar to reenlistment was initiated citing four of his NJPs, and repeated counseling for being derelict in the performance of his duties.

The applicant was found guilty by a summary court-martial of two periods of AWOL, 2 through 5 November 1972 and 13 through 30 November 1972.

On 28 March 1973, his command commenced discharge proceedings under Army Regulation 635-200, for unsuitability.  

The applicant acknowledged and waived his rights to have his case reviewed by a board of officers, to submit statements on his own behalf, and to be represented by counsel.  He acknowledged that he could expect to experience substantial prejudice in civilian life if he received a general discharge.  

The discharge authority waived the rehabilitation requirement and approved the applicant's discharge under Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 13b(3) for unsuitability with the issuance of a General Discharge Certificate.

The applicant was discharged on 18 May 1973 with a characterization of under honorable conditions.  He had 2 years, 3 months and 3 days of creditable service.

Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the policy and prescribes the procedures for administrative separation of enlisted personnel.  Chapter 13, in effect at that time, applied to separation for unfitness and unsuitability.  At that time, paragraph    13-5b(3) provided for the separation of individuals whose record evidenced apathy (lack of appropriate interest), defective attitudes, and an inability to expend effort constructively.

DISCUSSION:  Considering all the evidence, allegations, and information presented by the applicant, together with the evidence of record and applicable law and regulations, it is concluded:

1.  The 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.

2.  There is no evidence to support the applicant's contention that he was guaranteed any "buddy system”  option or that his obligated service was for anything other than the standard three year active duty obligation. 

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

___MHM__  __CLG__  _RJW_     DENY APPLICATION

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

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2002074328	
SUFFIX		
RECON		
DATE BOARDED	20030204	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE		
DATE OF DISCHARGE	19730518	
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY	AR 635-200 CH 13	
DISCHARGE REASON		
BOARD DECISION	DENY	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.	144	
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.