MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:        

	BOARD DATE:            27 January 1999 
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AC98-12676
				   AR1998012385

	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	
	Ms. Wanda L. Waller		Analyst	

The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Mr. James E. Vick		Chairperson	
	Ms. Margaret K. Patterson		Member	
	Mr. John H. Kern		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 discharge under other than honorable conditions be upgraded to general.

APPLICANT STATES:  In effect, that at the time of his discharge he was young and not prepared emotionally to deal with the demands and responsibilities associated with the Army.  Following his discharge, he maintained full-time employment for 17 years with the same company and retired in 1996, he raised his son as a single parent after his wife’s death in 1975 and has become a law-abiding citizen.  He asks the Board to consider his youth and immaturity while in the military and his post-service conduct.  In support of his application, he submits two character reference letters in support of his contention of good post-service conduct and a police report which reflects an alcohol related arrest in 1972.

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

He entered active duty on 23 July 1959 for a period of 3 years.  He successfully completed basic and advanced individual training (AIT) at Fort Jackson, South Carolina.  Upon completion of his AIT he was reassigned to Fort Campbell, Kentucky, to attend basic airborne training on 12 December 1959. 

On 19 September 1960, the applicant was convicted by summary court-martial (SCM) of being AWOL from 24 August 1960 to 6 September 1960.  His punishment consisted of confinement at hard labor for 1 month, a forfeiture of pay and reduction to E-1.  The convening authority approved the sentence on
19 September 1960.    

On 16 November 1960, the applicant voluntarily requested to terminate his airborne status and was transferred to the 86th Transportation Company at Fort Campbell, Kentucky.

On 14 June 1961, the applicant was convicted by SCM of failing to go to his appointed place of duty.  His punishment consisted of confinement at hard labor for 30 days and a forfeiture of pay.  The convening authority approved the sentence on 14 June 1961.    

On 3 November 1961, the applicant was again convicted by SCM of failing to go to his appointed place of duty, disobeying a lawful order and breaking restriction. His punishment consisted of confinement at hard labor for 30 days, a forfeiture of pay and reduction to E-1.  The convening authority approved the sentence on
3 November 1961.    

On 5 December 1961 the applicant’s commander initiated a recommendation to discharge him from the service under the provisions of Army Regulation (AR) 635-208 for unfitness due to frequent incidents of a discreditable nature with military authorities.  He based his recommendation for separation on the applicant’s continued misconduct, negative attitude and lack of motivation for further active duty.  

The applicant went AWOL on 16 December 1961 and was apprehended and returned to military control on 16 January 1962.    

On 24 January 1962, he was convicted by SCM of the aforementioned AWOL period.  His punishment consisted of confinement at hard labor for 1 month, a forfeiture of pay and reduction to E-1.  The convening authority approved the sentence on 24 January 1962.    

On 18 January 1962 the intermediate commander recommended that the applicant be discharged under the provisions of AR 635-208 with an Undesirable Discharge.

The applicant underwent a psychiatric evaluation and medical examination and was cleared for administrative separation.  

After consulting with counsel, the applicant waived consideration of his case by a board of officers and representation by counsel.  He also elected not to submit a statement in his own behalf.

The appropriate authority approved the recommendation on 26 January 1962 and directed that he be furnished an Undesirable Discharge Certificate.

Accordingly, he was discharged under other than honorable conditions on
2 February 1962.  He had served 2 years, 2 months and 13 days of total active service and had 119 days lost time due to AWOL and confinement.

Army Regulation 635-208, in effect at the time, set forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel for unfitness.  Section II of the regulation provided, in pertinent part, for the separation of personnel for frequent incidents of a discreditable nature with civil or military authorities.  An undesirable discharge was normally considered appropriate. 

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 administrative separation was accomplished in compliance with applicable regulations with no indication of procedural errors which would tend to jeopardize his rights. 

2.  The type of discharge directed and the reasons therefore were appropriate considering all the facts of the case.

3.  Careful consideration has been given to the applicant’s post-service conduct.  However, the applicant’s record of undistinguished service, combined with his disciplinary record, does not warrant equitable relief.

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

___jhk___  ___jev __  ___mkp _  DENY APPLICATION

						Loren G. Harrell
						Director

INDEX

CASE ID	AC98-12676/AR1998012385	
SUFFIX		
RECON	 	
DATE BOARDED	1999/01/27	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE	UOTHC	
DATE OF DISCHARGE	1962/02/02	
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY	AR635-208	
DISCHARGE REASON	Unfitness	
BOARD DECISION	DENY	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.  A51.00		
2.  		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.