APPLICANT REQUESTS:  That his undesirable discharge be upgraded.

APPLICANT STATES:  In effect, that he was an alcoholic.  At his court-martial he had a statement and evidence of his acute alcoholism, but his attorney did not enter his evidence and simply said “guilty” and rested.

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

He was born on 7 September 1943.  He completed 12 years of formal education. On 15 October 1962, he enlisted in the Regular Army for 3 years.  He completed basic combat training and advanced individual training and was awarded military occupational specialty 951.10 (Military Policeman).

On 9 July 1964, the applicant accepted non-judicial punishment (NJP) under Article 15, Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) for failure to obey a general regulation by not possessing items of uniform issue in a serviceable condition.

On 22 July 1964, the applicant accepted NJP under Article 15, UCMJ for being drunk and disorderly.

On 27 January 1965, the applicant was convicted by a special court-martial of being absent without leave (AWOL) for the periods 11 - 20 August 1964,            8 September - 1 October 1964, and 5 October - 20 November 1964 and for escaping from lawful confinement.  He was sentenced to confinement at hard labor for 6 months, suspended (suspension later vacated) and to forfeit $55 pay for 6 months.

On 4 August 1965, the applicant’s commander recommended he be separated under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-208 for unfitness.

On 4 August 1965, the applicant waived his right to appear before a board of officers, waived his right to counsel and elected not to submit a statement in his own behalf.

On 5 August 1965, the applicant completed a separation physical and was found qualified for separation.  The applicant made no mention of an alcohol or any other medical problem on his Report of Medical History.

On 5 August 1965, the applicant received a psychiatric evaluation.  No psychosis, neurosis, organic brain syndrome or mental deficiency was found.  He was found to be able to distinguish right from wrong and to adhere to the right and to be mentally capable of understanding and participating in board proceedings.

On 10 August 1965, the applicant was convicted by a special court-martial of being AWOL for the periods 14 - 23 February 1965 and 3 May - 13 July 1965 and of violating parole by leaving the installation limits.  He was sentenced to confinement at hard labor for 6 months and to forfeit $48 pay for 6 months.

On 11 August 1965, the appropriate authority approved the recommendation  and directed the applicant receive an Undesirable Discharge Certificate.

On 25 August 1965, the applicant was discharged, in pay grade E-1, under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-208 for unfitness, with an undesirable discharge.  He had completed 1 year, 10 months and 15 days of creditable active service and had 361 days of lost time. 

Army Regulation 635-208, in effect at the time, set forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel for unfitness.  The regulation provided for the discharge of individuals by reason of unfitness with an undesirable discharge when it had been determined that an individual’s military record was characterized by one of more of the following:  frequent incidents of a discreditable nature with civil or military authorities; sexual perversion; drug addiction or the unauthorized use or possession of habit forming narcotic drugs or marijuana; an established pattern for shirking; or an established pattern showing dishonorable failure to pay just debts.

On 16 August 1977, the Army Discharge Review Board (ADRB) denied the applicant’s request for an upgraded discharge.

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 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.  He had the opportunity to appear before a board of officers to present his own case, to representation by counsel or to submit a statement in his own behalf; he elected to waive these rights.

3.  The discharge given appropriately characterizes the applicant’s service given his two court-martials and his record of other disciplinary actions.

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

                       DENY APPLICATION

						Loren G. Harrell
						Director