MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF: 

	BOARD DATE:      4 March 1998 
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AC97-10275

	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.  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Ms.	Karen J. Newsome		Chairperson	
	Mr.	Raymond V. O’Connor Jr.		Member	
	Ms.	Margaret K. Patterson		Member	

	Also present, without vote, were:

	Mr.	Karl F. Schneider		Acting Director	
	Mr.	Joseph A. Adriance		Analyst	

	The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein.

	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 (GD) be upgraded to honorable (HD).

APPLICANT STATES:  In effect, that he respectfully request consideration for an upgrade to his discharge based on the length of time since his separation and the fact that he has matured and realizes his mistakes.

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

On 30 January 1970 the applicant was inducted into the Army of the United States for a period of 2 years at 18 years of age.  He successfully completed basic training at Fort Lewis, Washington and advanced individual training at Fort Sill, Oklahoma.  Upon completion of training he was awarded military occupational specialty (MOS) 13A (Cannoneer) and assigned to Fort Carson, Colorado for his first permanent duty station.

The applicant’s record contains no documentation of acts of achievement, valor, or service warranting special recognition.  However, his record contains an extensive record of disciplinary infractions.

On 21 August 1970 the applicant accepted nonjudicial punishment (NJP), under the provisions of Article 15 of the UCMJ, for violation of Article 86 (failure to repair).  His punishment included a reduction to private/E-1 (suspended for 60 days) and forfeiture of $29.05.

On 26 February 1971 he accepted an NJP for violation of Article 86 (absent from place of duty) and received the following punishment: forfeiture of $25.00 for one month; reduction to private/E-2 (suspended until 30 March 1971); and 14 days of extra duty.

On 5 April 1971 he accepted another NJP for violation of Article 86 (failure to go to appointed place of duty) and was punished by being reduced to private/E-2 (suspended until 4 May 1971) and 14 days of extra duty.

On 9 April 1971 the suspended portion of the punishment received in the 5 April NJP pertaining to reduction to private/E-2 was vacated. 
On 6 July 1971 he again accepted an NJP for violation of Article 86 (without authority absent himself from place of duty) for which he was reduced to private/E-1 and forfeited 7 days of pay.

On 4 August 1971 the applicant’s unit commander recommended he be separated based on unsuitability, under the provisions of paragraph 6(b)1,2, and 3 of Army Regulation 635-212.  

On 6 August 1971 the applicant consulted counsel and 
completed his election of rights on which he waived the 
following rights: consideration of his case before a board 
of officers; personal appearance before a board of officers;
representation by counsel; and he elected not to make a 
statement in his own behalf.

On 14 September 1971 the appropriate authority approved the separation action and directed the applicant be issued a GD. Accordingly, on 15 September 1971 the applicant was discharged after completing 1 year, 5 months, and 22 days of active military service and accruing 58 days of time lost due to AWOL.

Army Regulation 635-212, then in effect, provided in pertinent part the policies, procedures, and guidance for the prompt elimination of enlisted personnel who were determined to be unsuitable for further military service.

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 discharge proceedings were conducted in accordance with law and regulation applicable at the time.  The reason for and the character of the discharge are commensurate with the applicant's overall record of military service.

2.  The contentions of the applicant have been noted by the Board.  However, the Board did not find the passage of time since the discharge and the applicant’s subsequent maturity sufficiently mitigating to warrant an upgrade of his discharge.

3.  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.

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.

BOARD VOTE:

                       GRANT          

                       GRANT FORMAL HEARING

                       DENY APPLICATION

						Karl F. Schneider
						Acting Director