MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:   

	BOARD DATE:           3 July 2003                  
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR2003083489 

	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. Raymond V. O'Connor, Jr.		Chairperson	
	Ms. Kathleen A. Newman		Member	
	Mr. Patrick H. McGann, Jr.		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 would like the Board to consider his post service contributions to veterans and his community and grant him an upgrade based upon these post service contributions.  He states that since he became a paraplegic in 1981, he has given a large amount of time and effort to working with veterans.

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

He entered active duty on 2 July 1975.  He completed basic combat training and advanced individual training with award of the military occupational specialty (MOS) 52B (Power Generator Operator). 

The applicant received nonjudicial punishment under Article 15, Uniform Code of Military Justice, on two occasions:  on 1 April 1976 for theft of a floor ashtray from the post exchange; and on 13 December 1976 for failure to go to his appointed place of duty. 

The applicant was notified that his command proposed to discharge him under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 13, for unfitness.  At this time, the applicant had charges pending for failure to go to his appointed place of duty and being absent with out leave (AWOL) for 1 day.  The specifics of these charges are not of record.

On 15 December 1976, the applicant was advised of his rights.  In acknowledging those rights, he waived:  consideration of his case by a board of officers; making a personal appearance before a board of officers; submitting a personal statement, or the right to counsel.  He acknowledged that he might encounter substantial prejudice in civilian life in the event he received a general discharge.

The applicant’s unit commander’s formal recommendation that the applicant be discharged for unfitness indicated that the applicant was a borderline performer.  He reported that the applicant had been counseled of numerous occasions, both formally and informally, on what was expected of him.  The unit commander indicated that the applicant had been constantly involving himself in actions of a discreditable nature and had been implicated in at least one incident of barracks larceny.  The unit commander recommended that the applicant be discharged with an undesirable discharge. 

The discharge authority reviewed the recommendation and directed that the applicant be discharged under Army Regulation 635-200, for unfitness, with a general discharge.

The applicant was discharged with a general discharge on 10 January 1977.  He had 1 year, 6 months, and 9 days of creditable service.

The applicant submits copies of documents to show his post service efforts, including:  his work with the Paralyzed Veterans of America (PVA); award of the PVA’s 2001 Dwain Taylor Award for Voluntary Service; a Certificate of Participation in the 1998 National Veterans' Wheelchair Games; a copy of his academic record at California University of Pennsylvania and a letter showing he made the Dean’s List in 1987; and five 1990 letters of recommendation from members of the college staff attesting to his efforts and character.

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.  Paragraph 13-5(a)1 provided for the separation for unfitness, which included frequent incidents of a discreditable nature, sexual perversion, drug abuse, shirking, failure to pay just debits, failure to support dependents and homosexual acts.  When separation for unfitness was warranted, an undesirable discharge was normally considered appropriate.

Army Regulation 635-200, sets forth the purpose and policies for enlisted personnel separations.  Chapter 3, as in effect at that time, outlines the criteria for characterization of service.  Paragraph 3-7a states that an honorable discharge (HD) is a separation with honor.  The honorable characterization of service is appropriate when the quality of the soldier’s service generally has met the standards of acceptable conduct and performance of duty.  Paragraph 3-7a(1) in pertinent part states:  “A soldier will not necessarily be denied an honorable discharge solely by reason of a specific number of convictions by court-martial or actions under the UCMJ Art l5.”  “It is a pattern of behavior and not the isolated instance which should be considered the governing factor in determination of character of service.”  Paragraph 3-7b state that a general discharge (GD) is a separation under honorable conditions issued to a soldier whose military record was satisfactory but not so meritorious as to warrant an honorable discharge.  Paragraph 3-7c states that an under other than honorable conditions (UOTHC) discharge is issued when there is one or more acts or omissions that constitute a significant departure from conduct expected of a soldier.  Paragraph 3-7c(7) specifically addresses issuance of an UOTHC for discharges issued under the provisions of chapter 10 of this regulation.

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 was generous as at the time of discharge an undesirable discharge was normally considered appropriate.

2.  While the Board applauds the positive actions the applicant has taken to overcome his personal disability and assist others, it finds these efforts are not so meritorious as to outweigh the offenses that lead to his discharge, or the fact that his record of only 1 year, 6 months, and 9 days of service was devoid of any evidence of significant redeeming service.

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

__RVO__  ___KAN_  __PHM __  DENY APPLICATION

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

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2003083489	
SUFFIX		
RECON		
DATE BOARDED	20030703	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE		
DATE OF DISCHARGE		
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY		
DISCHARGE REASON		
BOARD DECISION	DENY	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.	Upgrade post service	
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.