MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:   

	BOARD DATE:           22 September 1999                   
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR1999023858

	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:

	Ms. Margaret K. Patterson		Chairperson	
	Mr. Curtis L. Greenway		Member	
	Mr. John P. Infante		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.

APPLICANT STATES:  That he had personality conflicts with his commander and was submitted to improper treatment.  He requested transfer many times and was denied.  At the time of his discharge he was being considered for promotion to corporal.  No supporting evidence is provided.

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

He was inducted into the Army on 17 May 1960.  On 23 September 1960, he was honorably discharged for the purpose of enlisting in the Regular Army on          24 September 1960.  He completed basic combat training and advanced individual training and was awarded military occupational specialty 941.1 (Cook).

The applicant was promoted to Private First Class, E-3 on 22 October 1961.  He was reduced to Private, E-2 (PV2) on 6 July 1962; reduced to Private, E-1 (PV1) on 24 November 1962; promoted to PV2 on 24 December 1962; reduced to PV1 on 2 January 1963; promoted to PV2 on 2 February 1963; and reduced to PV1 on 4 March 1963.

The applicant accepted non-judicial punishment under Article 15, Uniform Code of Military Justice on two occasions for being drunk and disorderly. 

Between November 1962 and January 1963, the applicant was convicted by a summary court-martial on three occasions for going from his appointed place of duty without authority; unlawfully entering the mess hall with intent to commit a criminal offense and suffering, without authority, a chicken and cake to be wrongfully disposed of; and being absent without authority from 1900 hours until 2330 hours 31 December 1962 and breaking restriction on 2330 hours               31 December 1962, respectively.

On 2 January 1963, the applicant received a psychiatric evaluation.  No psychiatric contraindication to administrative separation under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-208 was found; however, since his personality pattern was determined to be characterological in nature, it was recommended he be separated under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-209 (unsuitability).

On 29 January 1963, the applicant’s commander recommended he be separated under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-208 for unfitness.  The commander noted that the applicant worked as a cook in the battalion consolidated mess hall and had worked for three different mess stewards within recent months and that the previous battery commander had considered him for separation.  In a forwarding endorsement, the group commander noted the applicant had served under three battery commanders.  He also noted that transfer to another battalion was not recommended due to the applicant’s statement that he desired to get out of the Army at any cost. 

The applicant was advised of the basis for the recommended separation action.  He did not desire counsel, waived his right to appear before a board of officers and elected not to submit a statement in his own behalf.

On 4 March 1963, the appropriate authority approved the recommendation and directed the applicant receive an undesirable, UOTHC discharge.

On 1 April 1963, the applicant was discharged, in pay grade E-1, under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-208 for unfitness, with a discharge UOTHC.  He had completed 2 years, 4 months and 25 days of creditable active service and had 44 days of lost time (confinement). 

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.

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.  While the applicant never received a rehabilitative transfer, the evidence of record shows that he served under three different battery commanders and three different supervisors with no change in his pattern of behavior.  He had an opportunity to request a hearing before a board of officers and declined that opportunity.  The Board concludes that the type of discharge was appropriate considering his overall record of service.

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

__mkp___  __clg___  __jpi___  DENY APPLICATION

						Loren G. Harrell
						Director

INDEX

CASE ID	AR1999023858	
SUFFIX		
RECON		
DATE BOARDED	19990922	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE	UOTHC	
DATE OF DISCHARGE	19630401	
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY	AR 635-208 	
DISCHARGE REASON	A51.00	
BOARD DECISION	(DENY)	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.	110.00	
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.