MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:       

	BOARD DATE:            23 JANUARY 2003                  
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR2002076814

	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	
	Ms. Deborah L. Brantley		Senior Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Ms. Kathleen A. Newman		Chairperson	
	Ms. Gail J. Wire		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:  In effect, reconsideration of his request to have his "under other than honorable conditions" discharge upgraded.

APPLICANT STATES:  That he sustained an injury to his shoulder and should have been reassigned to another organization.  He notes that he was a good soldier and was never court-martialed for any of his "supposed" misconduct and discreditable actions.  He states he was discharged for "being a good soldier."

NEW EVIDENCE OR INFORMATION:  Incorporated herein by reference are military records which were summarized in a memorandum (AR1998012379) prepared to reflect the Board's original consideration of his case on 14 January 1999.  The applicant's basis for his current request constitutes a new argument, which requires consideration by the Board.

The applicant's service medical records indicate he was treated for a shoulder injury in November 1980 while undergoing airborne training.  The applicant was given a temporary profile, but ultimately completed the training in January 1981 and on 1 February 1981 was assigned to Hunter Army Airfield in Georgia as an infantryman.  On 25 February 1981 he was reassigned to Fort Stewart, Georgia as a "Personnel Carrier Driver."

The applicant's records of misconduct, which resulted in punishment under Article 15 of the Uniformed Code of Misconduct, occurred prior to, and following, his shoulder injury.

On 30 December 1981, while the applicant was being processed for administrative separation, he signed a statement declining his right to undergo a separation physical examination.  However, the applicant's physical profile, reflected on an August 1981 Personnel Qualification Record (Department of The Army Form 2) was recorded as 1-1-1-1-1-1, indicating he had no physical problems or limitations.  His Physical Category Code was recorded as "A."

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.  There is no evidence, and the applicant has not provided any, which indicates that his November 1980 shoulder injury impacted on his ability to perform his military duties or in anyway contributed to the misconduct that resulted in his administrative separation.  The evidence of record does not support the applicant's contention that he was a "good soldier."  

2.  Additionally, the Board notes that the fact the applicant was not court-martialed for any of his actions is not an indication that his administrative separation was in error or unjust.  Rather, the Board concludes that the applicant's command may have been attempting to assist the soldier in becoming a better soldier merely by imposing nonjudicial punishment, rather than stigmatizing him with a record of court-martial.  When their attempts failed, they chose an appropriate course of action by administratively discharging him.

3.  The overall merits of the case, including the latest arguments are insufficient as a basis for the Board to reverse its previous decision.

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.

NOTE:  

BOARD VOTE:

________  ________  ________  GRANT

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

__KAN __  __GJW__  ___PHM_  DENY APPLICATION

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

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2002076814	
SUFFIX		
RECON	20020123	
DATE BOARDED	YYYYMMDD	
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.	110.00	
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.