MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:   

	BOARD DATE:                              
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AC9708895

	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. Loren G. Harrell		Director	
	M		Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Mr. 		Chairperson	
	Mr. 		Member	
	Mr. 		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 general discharge, under honorable conditions be upgraded to honorable. 

APPLICANT STATES:  “Because I’m a distinguish citizen, and I was a loyal and proud serviceman.”

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

He enlisted in the Regular Army on 18 November 1987.

On 4 August 1990 the applicant willfully destroyed government property.  On 6 December 1991 he assaulted a soldier by kicking him in the face with his foot.  He was also counseled for poor duty performance, sleeping on duty, failure to follow instructions on several occasions, and failure to report to his appointed place of duty.

During this period he received punishment under Article 15, UCMJ, on two occasions, and extensive counseling.

The applicant underwent a mental evaluation on 11 March 1992 which determined that he could distinguish between right and wrong.  Consequently, the applicant was cleared  psychiatrically for administrative action deemed necessary by command.

On 12 May 1992 the applicant’s commander initiated action to separate the applicant from the service under the provisions of AR 635-200, Chapter 14 for misconduct and commission of a serious offense.

The applicant declined counsel and elected not to submit a statement on his own behalf.

On 22 May 1992 the appropriate authority approved the action and directed that he be issued a General Discharge Certificate.

Accordingly, he was discharged on 2 June 1992 under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 14, for misconduct - commission of a serious offense.  He was credited with 4 years, 6 months, and 15 days total active service.

The applicant applied to the Army Discharge Review Board and was denied his upgrade request on 25 June 1998 based on a records review.  He was advised he may reapply for a personal appearance hearing.

Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basis 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, convictions by civil authorities, 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 is unlikely to succeed.

DISCUSSION:  Considering all the evidence, allegations, and information presented by the applicant, together with the evidence of record, applicable law and regulations, and it is concluded:

1.  The applicant’s separation under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, Chapter 14, for misconduct and commission of a serious offense, was administratively correct and in conformance with applicable regulations.

2.  Careful consideration has been given to the applicant’s contention.  However, the misconduct and commission of a serious offense preferred against him, specifically for assault on another solider was justified and valid.

3.  An Honorable discharge is a separation with honor and is appropriate when the quality of the member’s service generally has met the standards of acceptable conduct and performance of duty for Army personnel.  He has not convinced the Board he deserves an honorable characterization of his service.

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

________  ________  ________  DENY APPLICATION

						Loren G. Harrell
						Director