MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:        

	BOARD DATE:            21 December 1999
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR1999025464

	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. Jessie B. Strickland		Analyst	

The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Mr. Hubert O. Fry, Jr.		Chairperson	
	Ms. Meta Waller		Member	
	Ms. Debra Williams		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:  In effect, that he was young and foolish went he went AWOL and his service in Japan and Korea were excellent.  He goes on to state that he has no police record, he has been married for 46 years, has five children, 11 grand children, one great grand child, and has retired from the plumber’s union.  He also states that his brother and cousin are all military people and that his father was in the Navy in World War I.

EVIDENCE OF RECORD:  The applicant's military records were partially destroyed in the 1973 fire at the National Personnel Records Center in St. Louis, Missouri which destroyed millions of service records.  However, the surviving records show:

The applicant enlisted with parental consent at Fort Banks, Massachusetts on 27 May 1949 for a period of 3 years.

The applicant went AWOL from 11 June to 12 June 1949 and the record is silent as to the punishment he received.

The applicant was convicted by a summary court-martial on 14 March 1950 of being AWOL from Carlisle Barracks, Pennsylvania from 9 February to 21 February 1950.  He was sentenced to be reduced to the pay grade of E-1 and a forfeiture of pay.

He was again convicted by a summary court-martial on 28 March 1950 of being AWOL from Fort Monmouth, New Jersey from 20 March to 22 March 1950.  He was sentenced to a forfeiture of pay.

The applicant again went AWOL from 8 August to 9 August 1950 and again the record is silent as to any punishment for that offense.

He departed on 21 September 1950 to the Far East Command.  He arrived in Japan on 5 October and departed for Korea on 10 October 1950.  He served in four campaigns while in Korea and departed Korea on 13 May 1951 for assignment to Japan.  He remained in Japan until 10 August 1951 when he was returned to Travis Air Force Base, California on emergency leave.

After short assignments at Camp Stoneman, California, Camp Breckinridge, Kentucky, and the New York Port Authority he was assigned to Camp Kilmer, New Jersey on 7 February 1952.

On 16 May 1952 he was convicted by a special court-martial of being AWOL from 18 February to 18 March 1952.  He was sentenced to confinement at hard labor for 30 days and a forfeiture of pay.
The applicant again went AWOL on 18 March 1952 and remained absent in a deserter status until he surrendered to military authorities at Fort Banks on 25 March 1952.  The record is silent as to his punishment for that offense.

The applicant was discharged under honorable conditions on 12 November 1952 and was issued a General Discharge Certificate.  He had served 3 years, 2 months, and 20 days of total active service and had 86 days of lost time due to AWOL and confinement.  He was awarded the Korean Service Medal and the Army of Occupation Medal (Japan) for his service and his records show that he was not favorably considered for award of the Good Conduct Medal.

A review of the available records shows that the applicant’s character and efficiency ratings ranged from excellent, satisfactory, good, fair, to unsatisfactory.

There is no indication in the available records to show that the applicant ever applied to the Army Discharge Review Board for an upgrade of his discharge within that board’s 15-year statute of limitations.

Army Regulation 615-360, in effect at the time, served as the authority for the discharge of enlisted personnel on the expiration of their term of service.  It states, in pertinent part, that an Honorable Discharge Certificate would be furnished when the individual had character ratings of at least “very good”, efficiency ratings of at least “excellent”, had not been convicted by a general court-martial, had not been convicted by more than one special court-martial, and had been favorably considered/recommended for award of the Good Conduct Medal by the commander.  Individuals who do not qualify for an honorable discharge and who are not considered sub-standard personnel will be issued a General Discharge Certificate.

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.  Inasmuch as the applicant’s records show that he did not maintain the minimum character and efficiency ratings required for an honorable discharge, coupled with his disciplinary record and the fact that he was not favorably considered for award of the Good Conduct Medal, it must presumed, in the absence of evidence to the contrary, that the applicant’s character of service was properly characterized in accordance with the applicable regulations in effect at the time.
3.  The Board finds that the absence of a favorable recommendation for award of the Good Conduct Medal, his 86 days of lost time, and his character and efficiency ratings were in themselves sufficient to justify the award of a general discharge. 

4.  The applicant’s contentions have been noted by the Board.  However, given his disciplinary record as well as his undistinguished record of service, his contentions are not sufficient to mitigate relief in his case,

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

___hof __  __mw___  __dw____  DENY APPLICATION

						Loren G. Harrell
						Director

INDEX

CASE ID	AR1999025464	
SUFFIX		
RECON		
DATE BOARDED	1999/12/21	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE	GD	
DATE OF DISCHARGE	1952/11/12	
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY	AR615-365	
DISCHARGE REASON	ETS	
BOARD DECISION	DENY	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.  455 	144.0300/A03.00	
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.