MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:  

	BOARD DATE:  2 September 1999
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR1999019877

	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	
	Mr. Theodore G. Heartley		Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Ms. Margaret K. Patterson		Chairperson	
	Mr. James M. Alward		Member	
	Mr. Thomas N. Kuhn		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:  Upgrade of his undesirable discharge to a general discharge under honorable conditions.

APPLICANT STATES:  In effect, that the Army was too harsh in determining that, after a quick court-martial, he should be discharged under Section 8.  He further states that he was always a good soldier and dutiful worker; that a Christmas Eve of whiskey and beer drinking turned into a raucous party and his involvement in a homosexual episode resulting in his detention; and that in his post-service life, he lost track of his records and fellow soldiers who may have witnessed these events.  He adds that he has been a good citizen and never in the 55 years since this incident has he ever requested anything from the Army.

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

He was inducted in the Army on 4 November 1942.

He was hospitalized from 4 January 1944 to 12 January 1994 for mental evaluation.  His diagnosis indicated constitutional psychopathic state, sexual psychopathy and emotional instability.

His AGO Form 24, service record, indicated that on 7 April 1944, he was separated from active Army service in the rank of private with a discharge classified as not honorable in accordance with the provisions of Army Regulation (AR) 615-360 for habits and traits of character that rendered his retention undesirable.

AR 615-360, in effect at the time, set forth the policy and procedures for separation of enlisted personnel.  Section VIII provided for cases of ineptness (lack of a required degree of adaptability) and for those who demonstrated undesirable habits and traits of character.  This section stated the basic War Department policy that no man would be separated prior to the expiration of his term of service unless no useful service could be obtained from him.  Normally a blue discharge certificate stating only the pertinent regulation, but neither a reason for separation nor a characterization of service, was used to identify this other than honorable discharge.  An honorable discharge was issued to those individuals who tried faithfully to serve, but could not.

There was nothing in his records indicating his involvement in alcohol-related misconduct, detention by military authorities or court-martial.

There is no evidence that the applicant applied to the Army Discharge Review Board for upgrade of his discharge within its 15-year statute of limitations.

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 request is not warranted when the evidence of record is considered.

2.  The Board concludes that despite the absence of certain documents in his records that would substantiate his alleged misconduct and the specific circumstances of his separation such as a record of court-martial proceedings and/or a record of separation proceedings and his record of good citizen notwithstanding, he has not provided any evidence that would sufficiently mitigate his overall record of service to merit a discharge upgrade.

3.  His discharge on 7 April 1944 was accomplished in compliance with applicable regulations in effect at the time with no indication of procedural errors that would tend to jeopardize his rights.  The type of discharge directed and the reasons therefor were appropriate considering all the facts of the case.

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

__MP___  ___JA___  __TK____  DENY APPLICATION

						Loren G. Harrell
						Director

INDEX

CASE ID	AR1999019877	
SUFFIX		
RECON	YYYYMMDD	
DATE BOARDED	19990902	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE	(UD)	
DATE OF DISCHARGE	19440407	
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY	AR615-360	
DISCHARGE REASON	HABITS/TRAITS RET UNDESIRABLE	
BOARD DECISION	(DENY)	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.	110	
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.