MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 27 January 1999 DOCKET NUMBER: AC97-10212 AR1999016623 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. 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: That he applied for a direct commission to the Army’s Medical Service Corp and had strong letters of support and recommendations. He also states that he was unsuccessful in obtaining a direct commission but worked vigorously throughout his military career. EVIDENCE OF RECORD: The applicant's military records show: The applicant enlisted in the Army on 14 February 1992 for a period of 4 years. He had served 3 years and 14 days of total active service before being honorably discharge on 27 February 1995 to accept a commission as a warrant officer and to attend the warrant officer basic course. The applicant successfully completed the warrant officer basic course at Fort Rucker, Alabama. He remained at Fort Rucker and started the rotary wing aviation course (UH-60). While attending the rotary wing aviation course (UH-60) the applicant applied for a direct commission to the Army’s Medical Service Corp and it was denied. He received nonjudicial punishment on 18 July 1996 for being disrespectful towards a commissioned officer (Major General) by writing and sending him a letter, and for wrongfully and willingly impersonating a commissioned officer. On 24 July 1996 the applicant tendered his unqualified resignation from the Army under the provisions of Army Regulation 600-8-24, chapter 3, paragraph 3-5. He stated the reason for tendering his resignation was that his continuation in the service was no longer compatible with his future plans since his career was not progressing the way he desired. The resignation was approved by the appropriate authority and the applicant was discharged from the Army on 5 November 1996 with a general discharge. He was credited with 1 year, 8 months, and 8 days of active service during the period under review and 4 years, 8 months, and 12 days of total active service. The applicant submitted a request for an upgrade of his discharge to the Army Discharge Review Board, and it was denied on 30 June 1998. Army Regulation 600-8-24 sets forth the basic authority for policies and procedures governing transfer and discharge of Army officer personnel. Chapter 3 of this regulation prescribes the tasks, rules, and steps for processing voluntary resignations. An unqualified resignation accepted in the Total Army Personnel Command (PERCOM) will be under honorable conditions. A DD Form 256A (Honorable) or DD Form 257A (General) discharge certificate (based on the officer’s record of service) will be provided. 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. The applicant’s unqualified resignation was accomplished in compliance with applicable regulations with no indication of procedural errors which would tend to jeopardize his rights. 2. The applicant voluntarily submitted his unqualified resignation because of an incompatibility between his future plans and his career progression in the Army. 3. The Board concludes the applicant’s total active service did not sufficiently mitigate the nonjudicial punishment to warrant an upgrade of his characterization of service. 4. Relief is not warranted since the applicant has failed to show to the satisfaction of the Board that the record is in error or unjust. The applicant has failed to submit evidence and the Board found no evidence in the record 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 _____X___ ____X____ ____X____ DENY APPLICATION Loren G. Harrell Director INDEX CASE ID AC SUFFIX RECON YYYYMMDD DATE BOARDED YYYYMMDD TYPE OF DISCHARGE (HD, GD, UOTHC, UD, BCD, DD) DATE OF DISCHARGE YYYYMMDD DISCHARGE AUTHORITY AR . . . . . DISCHARGE REASON BOARD DECISION (NC, GRANT , DENY, GRANT PLUS) REVIEW AUTHORITY ISSUES 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6.