MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:       

	BOARD DATE:            23 March 2000
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR1999031525

	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. Jessie B. Strickland		Analyst	

The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Ms. Shirley L. Powell		Chairperson	
	Mr. Roger Able		Member	
	Mr. James E. Anderholm		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 discharge under other than honorable conditions (UOTHC) be upgraded to honorable.

APPLICANT STATES:  In effect, that he knows that he made a serious mistake and that he deserved some type of punishment for his actions; but he believes that his punishment in the form of a discharge UOTHC was too harsh.  He goes on to state that he is sorry for what he did and has been for 20 years since it occurred and that if he could go back and do it all over again he would fix it.  He continues by stating that he received his UOTHC discharge because of one bad response during a moment of anger and that he is asking the Board to forgive him for his mistake because he has been a good citizen with no criminal record and he desires a better discharge to improve his employability.

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

He enlisted in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania on 1 March 1976 for a period of 4 years and training as a radio operator.  He successfully completed his training and was transferred to Germany on 17 September 1976.  He was promoted to the pay grade of E-3 on 3 June 1976.

On 12 August 1977 nonjudicial punishment was imposed against him for being AWOL from 5 August to 6 August 1977.  His punishment consisted of a reduction to the pay grade of E-1, a forfeiture of pay, extra duty and restriction. 

On 20 October 1977 he was convicted by a special court-martial of being absent from his place of duty on 12 August 1977, of being disrespectful towards a superior NCO, of two specifications of disobeying a lawful order from a superior NCO, being drunk and disorderly, and communicating a threat.  He was sentenced to confinement at hard labor for 2 months and a forfeiture of pay.

On 17 November 1977 he was transferred to the Army Retraining Brigade at Fort Riley, Kansas to serve his confinement and undergo retraining.

The facts and circumstances surrounding the applicant’s administrative discharge are not present in the available records.  However, his records do contain a duly constituted report of separation authenticated by the applicant which shows that he was discharged UOTHC on 13 January 1978 under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 13, for unfitness based on his frequent involvement in incidents of a discreditable nature with civil or military authorities.  He had served 1 year, 8 months, and 23 days of total active service and had 50 days of lost time due to AWOL and confinement.

There is no indication in the available records which shows that the applicant applied to the Army Discharge Review Board for an upgrade of his discharge within that Board’s 15-year statute of limitations.
Army Regulation 635-200, in effect at the time, set forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel.  Chapter 13 established policy and procedures for separating personnel for unfitness.  Specific categories included minor infractions, a pattern of misconduct, involvement in frequent incidents of a discreditable nature with civil and military authorities, and commission of a serious offense.  A discharge under other than honorable conditions was normally considered appropriate.

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, it must be presumed that his administrative separation was accomplished in compliance with applicable regulations with no indication of procedural errors which would tend to jeopardize his rights.

2.  Accordingly, the type of discharge directed and the reasons therefor were appropriate considering all of the available facts of the case.

3.  The applicant’s contentions have been noted by the Board; however, they are not sufficiently mitigating when compared to his undistinguished record of service in such a relatively short period of time and the fact that he failed at rehabilitation attempts that would have afforded him the opportunity to return to duty and obtain an honorable discharge.

4.  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 the aforementioned requirement.

5.  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

___slp___  ___ja ___  __ra_____  DENY APPLICATION

						Karl F. Schneider
						Director, Army Review Boards Agency

INDEX

CASE ID	AR1999031525	
SUFFIX		
RECON		
DATE BOARDED	2000/03/23	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE	UOTHC	
DATE OF DISCHARGE	1978/01/13	
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY	AR635-200, ch 13	
DISCHARGE REASON		
BOARD DECISION	DENY	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.  189	110.0000	
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.