MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:      

	BOARD DATE:           17 JULY 2003                  
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR2003089945

	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. Kenneth H. Aucock		Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Ms. Joann H. Langston		Chairperson	
	Ms. Regan K. Smith		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 records be corrected to show that he retired from the Army with 17 plus years of active military service.  

APPLICANT STATES:  That he was not allowed to retire with the years of service that he had.  He loves the miltiary and has given the military some good years.  He served his country with dignity.  He served with honor and trained diligently.  He regrets the mistake he made in his decision at the time of his pain and anger to take a drug; however, he served his country with honor and love.  He not only damaged his military career, but also hurt his wife and children.  He asks for forgiveness, that he be retired, or that his reentry code on his DD Form 214 be corrected so that he can enlist in the Reserve components.

The applicant provides a 28 March 2003 statement of support from a former comrade, who stated that he has known the applicant for 16 years, and that the applicant was very responsible, displayed good leadership skills, and a tremendous ability to remain calm under pressure. 

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

Incorporated herein by reference are military records which were summarized in a memorandum, dated 2 May 2002, prepared to reflect the Board's consideration of his request that his discharge be changed to a medical retirement or that he be reinstated or his reentry code be changed to one that would allow him to reenlist (AR2002067523). 

The information in the applicant's NCO evaluation report for the 12 month period ending in May 1990 is as shown in the 2 May 2002 Board case.  Additionally, that report shows that his rater indicated that the applicant showed little motivation or pride in his unit.  His rater considered his potential for promotion or service in positions of greater responsibility as marginal.  Both his rater and senior rater deemed his performance and potential as poor.  His senior rater stated that the applicant constantly sought the easier wrong instead of the harder right, that he was an ineffective leader because of fear to discipline subordinates, and that he used misleading statements to superiors to excuse his mistakes.

The information in applicant's NCO evaluation report for the 11 month period ending in March 1993, is as shown in the 2 May 2002 Board case.  In addition, that report also shows that his rater indicated that the applicant placed his personal desires above the needs of his soldiers and the goals of the Army, that he constantly used deception to avoid duty, and that he lacked self discipline, courage, and integrity.  His rater considered his potential as marginal.  Both his rater and senior rater considered his overall performance and potential as poor.  His senior rater stated that he consistently used poor judgment, that his personal misconduct was a disgrace to the NCO Corps, and that he demonstrated no potential for future military service and should be discharged immediately.
Army Regulation 635-200 implements 10 USC 3914 (twenty-year retirement law), and states in pertinent part that a soldier of the Regular Army who has completed 20 years of active Federal service may, at the discretion of the Secretary of the Army, be retired at his request.   

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.  Notwithstanding the applicant's statement and the statement of support he has received, there is insufficient reason to grant an exception to the twenty-year retirement law.  Nor is there reason to grant his request to change his reentry code.  That issue was properly addressed in the 2 May 2002 Board case.     

2.  The applicant has submitted neither probative evidence nor a convincing argument in support of his request.   

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 that 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

__JHL __  __RKS __  __JTM __  DENY APPLICATION

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

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2003089945	
SUFFIX		
RECON	YYYYMMDD	
DATE BOARDED	20030717	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE	(HD, GD, UOTHC, UD, BCD, DD, UNCHAR)	
DATE OF DISCHARGE	YYYYMMDD	
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY	AR .  .  .  .  .  	
DISCHARGE REASON		
BOARD DECISION	DENY	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.	136.00	
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.