MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:   

	BOARD DATE:            14 January 1999                  
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AC98-12848
				   AR1998013779

	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. Nancy Amos		Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Mr. Raymond V. O’Connor, Jr.		Chairperson	
	Ms. Shirley L. Powell		Member	
	Ms. Kathleen A. Newman		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 be upgraded to honorable.

APPLICANT STATES:  He makes no statement.

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

He enlisted in the Regular Army on 25 November 1957.  He completed basic combat training and advanced individual training and was awarded military occupational specialty 950.00 (Security Guard).  He arrived in Korea on 2 May 1958.

On 1 November 1958, the applicant was reduced to Private E-2 for misconduct.  The Article 15 is not available.

The applicant departed Korea on 2 May 1959 and was reassigned to the 823d Ordnance Company, North Depot Activity, Romulus, NY.

On 25 November 1959, the applicant accepted non-judicial punishment under Article 15, Uniform Code of Military Justice for disobeying a lawful order.

On 30 November 1959, a medical evaluation diagnosed the applicant with passive-aggressive reaction, chronic, mild and not disabling.  He was found to be able to distinguish right from wrong, adhere to the right and refrain from the wrong and to have no signs of any thinking disorder or psychosis.

Separation action under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-209 for unsuitability, apathy, was initiated.  His commander had noted the applicant’s two records of Article 15s, five separate incidents in the previous four months with civilian authorities that brought discredit upon himself and the Army, and his negative and hostile attitude towards fulfillment of his military obligation.

The applicant was counseled and advised of the basis for the action, did not request counsel and did not submit a statement in his own behalf.

On 15 January 1960, a board of officers convened to determine if he should be discharged.  The board recommended the applicant be discharged because of unsuitability, apathy and recommended he receive a general discharge.  The appropriate authority approved the recommendation.

On 15 January 1960, the applicant was discharged, in pay grade E-2, under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-209 for unsuitability, apathy, with a general discharge under honorable conditions.  He had completed 2 years, 1 month and 21 days of creditable active service and had no lost time.

Army Regulation 635-209 set forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel for unsuitability.  That regulation provided, in pertinent part, that a member with a character or behavior disorder, disorder of intelligence, or transient personality disorder due to acute or special stress and was unlikely to develop sufficiently to participate in further military training and or become a satisfactory soldier, would be discharged for unsuitability.

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 with no indication of procedural errors which would tend to jeopardize his rights.

3.  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_____  SLP_____  KAN_____  DENY APPLICATION

						Loren G. Harrell
						Director

INDEX

CASE ID	AC98-12848/AR1998013779	
SUFFIX		
RECON		
DATE BOARDED	19990114	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE	GD	
DATE OF DISCHARGE	1960/01/15	
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY	AR 635-209  .  .  .  .  	
DISCHARGE REASON	A40.00	
BOARD DECISION	(DENY)	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.	110.00	
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.