MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION


         IN THE CASE OF:
        


         BOARD DATE: 3 October 2002
         DOCKET NUMBER: AR2002076237

         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. Nancy L. Amos		Analyst

The following members, a quorum, were present:

Ms. Irene N. Wheelwright		Chairperson
Mr. Walter T. Morrison		Member
Mr. Charles Gainor		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 under honorable conditions be upgraded to fully honorable.

APPLICANT STATES: That his commander lied, disrespected him because he was black and 18 years old with an 8th grade education, and hit him several times. He was proud to serve in the Army. He wanted to retire so his family would not have to worry about anything. Then his commander caused his wife to leave him. He was given no hearing. Days were taken away from him so he could not get his full benefits. His basic training record will verify that he did nothing to demonstrate inadequate potential for promotion. He provides his Report of Transfer or Discharge, DD Form 214, as supporting evidence.

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

He was born on 14 March 1954. He had attended 2 years of high school and had an Armed Forces Qualification Test score of 24 (category IV). He enlisted in the Regular Army on 18 October 1972. He completed basic training and was sent to Fort Ord, CA to attend 76A (Supply Clerk) for advanced individual training.

On 1 March 1973, the applicant was dropped from the 76A course as an academic failure.

On 21 February 1973, the applicant's commander advised the applicant that he was being considered for elimination in accordance with Department of the Army message 242110Z September 1971 (the subject of the message is not known but it appears it may have been Elimination under the Qualitative Management Program for Failure to Demonstrate Adequate Potential for Promotion Advancement). On this date, the applicant acknowledged notification of his elimination under the Qualitative Management Program.

On 20 March 1973, the applicant's commander recommended the applicant for elimination under the Qualitative Management Program for failure to demonstrate adequate potential for promotion advancement. The commander cited the applicant's history of non-performance, his failure to respond to the military system, his need for constant supervision, and his academic drop from AIT. He recommended the applicant receive a general discharge under honorable conditions because he was absent without leave (AWOL) for 16 days and was then pending a field-grade Article 15.

On 21 March 1973, the applicant completed a separation physical and was found qualified for separation.

On 28 March 1973, the applicant's commander recommended him for a bar to reenlistment. He cited the applicant's needing constant supervision to perform the most simple tasks, his failure to support his wife, his academic drop from AIT and a 16-day AWOL. The commander noted that the applicant had been counseled on 9 and 10 January 1973, 17 and 21 February 1973, and 1 March 1973 but the counseling had no visible effects. The applicant elected not to make a statement.

On 29 March 1973, the applicant accepted nonjudicial punishment under Article 15, Uniform Code of Military Justice for being absent without leave from 1 to on or about 17 March 1973.

The applicant's bar to reenlistment was approved on 5 April 1973.

On 12 April 1973, the appropriate authority approved the applicant's discharge and directed he be issued a General Discharge Certificate.

On 25 April 1973, the applicant was discharged, in pay grade E-1, with a general discharge under honorable conditions after completing 5 months and 22 days of creditable active service with 16 days of lost time.

On 28 January 1987, the Army Discharge Review Board disapproved the applicant's request to upgrade his discharge.

Department of the Army message 242110Z September 1971 is not available.

Army Regulation 635-200 governs the separation of enlisted personnel. Chapter 11 sets the policy and prescribes procedures for separating members who were voluntarily enlisted in the Regular Army, National Guard or Army Reserve, are in an entry level status and, before the date of the initiation of separation action, have completed no more than 180 days of creditable continuous service, and have demonstrated that they are not qualified for retention. The following conditions are illustrations of conduct that do not qualify for retention: cannot or will not adapt socially or emotionally to military life; cannot meet the minimum standards prescribed for successful completion of training because of lack of aptitude, ability, motivation or self-discipline; or have demonstrated character and behavior characteristics not compatible with satisfactory continued service. An uncharacterized description of service is required for soldiers in an entry-level status.

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. There is no evidence in the available records or in the applicant’s supporting documentation to demonstrate that he was the victim of racial prejudice. At the time he was given his bar to reenlistment, the applicant had an opportunity to comment on or rebut his commander's reasons (his needing constant supervision to perform the most simple tasks, his failure to support his wife, his academic drop from AIT, and a 16-day AWOL, most of the same reasons which were cited in the elimination packet) for recommending the bar but he failed to do so.

3. Department of the Army message 242110Z September 1971 is not available; however, in the absence of evidence to the contrary it is presumed that the applicant’s separation was accomplished in compliance with applicable regulations with no indication of procedural errors which would tend to jeopardize his rights. Under current regulations, the applicant could have been discharged for the same reasons for which he was separated in 1973, the only difference being he would have been given an uncharacterized description of service rather than a general discharge under honorable conditions.

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

__INW__ ___WTM___ __CG __ DENY APPLICATION

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

---

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2002076237
SUFFIX
RECON
DATE BOARDED	2002/10/03
TYPE OF DISCHARGE	GD
DATE OF DISCHARGE	1973/04/25
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY	AR 635-200, ch 4
DISCHARGE REASON	A04.00
BOARD DECISION	DENY
REVIEW AUTHORITY
ISSUES 1.	110.00
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.