MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:   

	BOARD DATE:          18 March 1999                     
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AC98-13083
				   AR1998012405

	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. Nancy Amos		Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Mr. James M. Alward		Chairperson	
	Ms. Karen Y. Fletcher		Member	
	Mr. Ernest W. Lutz, Jr.		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 (UOTHC) be upgraded to a general discharge under honorable conditions.

APPLICANT STATES:  He is a homeless veteran and needs medical attention.

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

He enlisted in the Regular Army on 18 May 1966.  He completed basic combat training and advanced individual training and was awarded military occupational specialty 05B (Radio Operator).

The applicant accepted non-judicial punishment under Article 15, Uniform Code of Military Justice on four occasions for being incapacitated for his duties as a result of previous indulgence in intoxicating liquor; being absent without leave (AWOL); being derelict in the performance of his duties in that he failed to shave prior to an inspection; and being absent without proper authority, respectively.

On 27 March 1967, the applicant was convicted by a special court-martial of failure to repair and breaking arrest in quarters.  He was sentenced to hard labor for 3 months and to forfeit $37 pay for 4 months.

On 18 April 1967, the applicant was convicted by a special court-martial of failing to go to his appointed place of duty (bed check, hard labor and reveille), being AWOL and disobeying a lawful order.  He was sentenced to confinement at hard labor for 6 months and to forfeit $37 pay for 6 months.

On 31 July 1967, the applicant was convicted by a special court-martial of violating the conditions of his parole.  He was sentenced to confinement at hard labor for 3 months and to forfeit $37 pay for 6 months.

On 24 February 1968, the applicant was convicted by a special court-martial of being AWOL.  He was sentenced to confinement at hard labor for 6 months and to forfeit $68 pay for 6 months.

On 8 May 1968, the applicant completed a separation physical examination.  A mental hygiene consultation diagnosed an impression of passive-aggressive personality with marked antisocial features but psychiatically cleared the applicant for appropriate administrative action under Army Regulation 635-212.  He was found qualified for separation.

On 12 June 1968, the commander notified the applicant that he was being considered for separation under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-212 for unfitness, frequent acts of a discreditable nature with military authorities.

On 14 June 1968, the applicant acknowledged the separation action.  He waived consideration of his case by a board of officers, waived personal appearance before such a board, waived representation by counsel before such a board, and did not submit any statements in his own behalf.  He acknowledged that he understood that, as a result of issuance of an undesirable discharge under conditions other than honorable, he might be ineligible for many or all benefits as a veteran under both Federal and State laws.

On 29 July 1968, the appropriate authority approved the recommendation for separation and directed issuance of an Undesirable Discharge Certificate.  

On 8 August 1968, the applicant was discharged, with a discharge UOTHC, in pay grade of E-1, under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-212 for unfitness. He had completed10 months and 29 days of creditable active service and had 472 days of lost time (48 days AWOL and 424 days confinement time).

Army Regulation 635-212, in effect at the time, set forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel.  The regulation provided, in pertinent part, that members involved in frequent incidents of a discreditable nature with civil or military authorities were subject to separation for unfitness.  An undesirable, UOTHC 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.  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.  The applicant has failed to submit evidence that would satisfy the aforementioned requirement.

2.  The applicant’s administrative separation was accomplished in compliance with applicable regulations.  Considering his conviction by four special courts-martial and his four Article 15s, the characterization of his discharge as under other than honorable conditions was and still is appropriate.

3.  The Board is empathetic with the applicant’s current problems, but they are not sufficiently mitigating to warrant an upgrade of his discharge.

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

__JMA___  __KYF___  __EWL___  DENY APPLICATION

						Loren G. Harrell
						Director

INDEX

CASE ID	AC98-13083/AR1998012405	
SUFFIX		
RECON		
DATE BOARDED	19990318	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE	UOTHC	
DATE OF DISCHARGE	19680808	
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY	AR 635-212	
DISCHARGE REASON	A51.00	
BOARD DECISION	(DENY)	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.	110.00	
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.