MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:       

	BOARD DATE:           29 November 2001
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR2001064006

	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. Robert J. McGowan		Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Mr. Raymond V. O'Connor, Jr.		Chairperson	
	Mr. John P. Infante		Member	
	Mr. William D. Powers		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 (GD) be upgraded to an Honorable Discharge (HD).

APPLICANT STATES:  His wife put him in debt and led to his discharge.  He has divorced his wife.

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

He enlisted in the Regular Army for 3 years on 8 June 1993.  Following all required military training, he was assigned to Fort Knox, Kentucky.

Between March and December 1994, the applicant amassed $1,336.71 in dishonored checks to the Post Exchange, Post Commissary, and various off-post businesses.  He was repeatedly counseled concerning his responsibilities to pay his just debts, but he did not respond.

On 21 June 1994, the applicant accepted nonjudicial punishment (NJP) under Article 15, Uniform Code of Military Justice, for disobeying the lawful order of a noncommissioned officer (NCO).  As punishment, he was reduced from grade
E-3 to E-2 (suspended) and given 14 days' extra duty.  On 13 December 1994, the suspended reduction was vacated and the applicant was reduced to grade
E-2.

On 11 January 1995, the applicant's commander initiated action to separate the applicant for misconduct (pattern of misconduct) under the provisions of chapter 14, Army Regulation (AR) 635-200.  The applicant acknowledged his commander's intent and subsequently met with legal counsel who explained the basis for the separation action, its effects, and the applicant's rights.  On 24 January 1995, the separation action was forwarded to the approving authority with a recommendation that the applicant be separated with a GD.  On 3 February 1995, the approving authority approved the separation and directed the issuance of a GD.

On 24 February 1995, the applicant was separated with a GD.  He had 1 year, 8 months, and 17 days of creditable active Federal service and no 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, to include abuse of illegal drugs, convictions by civil authorities and desertion or absence without leave.  Action will be taken to separate a member for misconduct when it is clearly established that rehabilitation is impractical or unlikely to succeed.  Army policy states that a discharge under other than honorable conditions is normally considered appropriate, but a general discharge under honorable conditions or an honorable discharge may be granted.

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 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.

2.  The applicant's short military career was beset by numerous problems involving indebtedness and poor financial management, disobedience, and an absence of discipline.  His discharge proceedings were conducted in accordance with law and regulations applicable at the time.  The character of his discharge is commensurate with his overall record of military service.

3.  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_  __JPI     _  __WPD__  DENY APPLICATION

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

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2001064006	
SUFFIX		
RECON		
DATE BOARDED	20011129	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE	GD	
DATE OF DISCHARGE	19950224	
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY	AR 635-200 C14	
DISCHARGE REASON	A60.00	
BOARD DECISION	DENY	
REVIEW AUTHORITY	DIRECTOR	
ISSUES         1.	110.0000	
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.