MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:       

	BOARD DATE:            13 MAY 1999                  
	DOCKET NUMBER:    AR1998013218

	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	
	Mrs. Carolyn G. Wade		Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Mr. Raymond V. O’Connor  Jr.		Chairperson	
	Mr. Samuel Caleron		Member	
	Mr. Kenneth L. Wright		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 undesirable discharge (UD) of 5 January 1965 be upgraded to a general discharge (GD).

APPLICANT STATES:  In effect, that he went AWOL and got a UD; that the Government gave clemency to the Vietnam draft dodgers; and that he wants a GD.  Accompanying the applicant's application is a letter from his wife stating, in effect, that it would be nice, for the time her husband has left, that all his discharges would be honorable.

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

The applicant initially enlisted in the Regular Army (RA) on 30 July 1955 and was honorably released from active duty on 24 July 1958 and transferred to the USAR Control Group after completing 2 years, 9 months, and 7 days of active military service.  He was released by reason of "Early Release Of Overseas Returnees."  The latter discharge is considered a complete and unconditional separation.

On 30 January 1960, after a break in service, the applicant enlisted in the RA and was honorably discharged on 7 January 1962 for the purpose of immediate reenlistment. 

On 8 January 1962, in Germany, the applicant reenlisted for a period of 6 years and his own vacancy.  At the time of his reenlistment he held the rank of specialist/E-5 and worked in Army Career Group 13 (i.e., Armor).

On 19 September 1962, in Germany, he was convicted by a Summary Court-martial of stealing two welding regulators of value $47.00.  He was sentenced to forfeit $100.00.

On 1 February 1964 he departed Germany enroute to Fort Knox, Kentucky.

On 15 April 1964, at Fort Knox, he accepted nonjudicial punishment under the provisions of Article 15, UCMJ for two specifications of failure to report to his prescribed place of duty.  His punishment consisted of a reduction in rank to specialist/E-4 and a forfeiture of $107.00.  He appealed the punishment and his appeal was denied.

The record indicates that on 6 May 1964 he departed Fort Knox in an AWOL status and remained so absent until 9 June 1964.  From 10 June through 8 July 1964 he was placed in pre-trial confinement awaiting adjudication of his AWOL.  On 9 July 1964 he was found guilty of the aforementioned AWOL by a Special Court-martial.  His sentence included a reduction in rank to private first class/E-3 and a forfeiture of $50.00 per month for 3 months.

On 11 July 1964 he departed AWOL and remained so absent until 26 October 1964 when he returned to military control at Fort Knox.  On 1 December 1964 he was tried and convicted by a Special Court-martial for the latter AWOL.  He was sentenced to 6 months confinement at hard labor, forfeiture of $48.00 per month for 6 months, and reduction to the rank of private/E-1.

On 5 January 1965, the applicant authenticated a statement with his signature indicating that he understood he was being discharged under the provisions of AR 635-208 with a UD.

The record also contains a properly constituted DD Form 214 (Armed Forces of the United States Report of Transfer or Discharge) indicating that he was discharged on 5 January 1965 under the provisions of AR 635-208 for unfitness - involved in frequent incidents of a discreditable nature with civil and military authorities and issued a UD.  The applicant authenticated his DD Form 214 with his signature.  At the time of his discharge the applicant had completed 2 years, 4 months, and 1 day in the period under review.

Army Regulation 635-208, then in effect, provided in pertinent part the policies, procedures, and guidance for the prompt elimination of enlisted personnel who were determined to be unfit 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, and advisory opinion(s), it is concluded:

1.  The facts and circumstances pertaining to the applicant's discharge are not on file.  The Report of Transfer or Discharge, DD Form 214, indicates that the applicant was discharged on  5 January 1965, under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-208, for Unfitness - involved in frequent incidents of a discreditable nature with civil or military authorities, and was issued a UD.

2.  In the absence of evidence to the contrary, it is presumed that the discharge proceedings were conducted in accordance with law and regulations applicable at the time.  The character of the discharge is commensurate with his overall record of service.

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

__rvo___  __sc____  ___klw___  DENY APPLICATION

						Loren G. Harrell
						Director

INDEX

CASE ID	AR1998013218	
SUFFIX		
RECON	YYYYMMDD	
DATE BOARDED	19990513	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE	UD	
DATE OF DISCHARGE	19650105	
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY	AR 635-208 	
DISCHARGE REASON	UNFITNESS	
BOARD DECISION	DENY	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.	A9217	
2.	A9201	
3.	A0100	
4.	A9235	
5.		
6.