MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:   

	BOARD DATE:           5 APRIL 2000
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR1999026900

	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. David H. Keller		Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Mr. Raymond V. O’Connor Jr.		Chairperson	
	Mr. Stanley Kelley		Member	
	Mr. Lester Echols		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 he be awarded 14 more days of time served so he can receive benefits.

APPLICANT STATES:  That when he was inducted into the service, he unknowingly had a rheumatic heart valve, so he should not have been in the service anyway.

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

He enlisted on 30 November 1964 for a period of 3 years.  He failed to complete basic training due to AWOL.

On 4 March 1965, the applicant was tried by summary court-martial and found guilty of AWOL from 10 January 1965 to 13 February 1965.  He was sentenced to hard labor without confinement for 30 days (suspended for 30 days), and forfeiture of $50.00.

A 9 March 1965 report of medical examination indicates that the applicant was medically qualified for separation with a physical profile of 1 1 1 1 1 1, indicating no physical or mental limitations for duty.  In the report of medical history the applicant furnished for the examination, he stated his health was “good.”  A report of mental status evaluation determined that he was mentally responsible, able to distinguish right from wrong and adhere to the right, that he had the mental capacity to understand and participate in board proceedings, and he met the medical standards for retention in the Army.

On 5 April 1965, the applicant’s commander recommended he be discharged for unsuitability under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-209.  The applicant consulted with counsel and waived consideration by a board of officers.  He acknowledged that he might expect to encounter substantial prejudice in civilian life if he was issued a discharge under other than honorable conditions, and that he may be ineligible for many or all benefits as a veteran under both federal and state laws.  He declined to submit a statement in his own behalf.  The separation authority approved the recommendation and directed the applicant be issued a General Discharge Certificate.

The applicant was discharged on 8 April 1965 at Fort Campbell, Kentucky.  He had 2 months and 16 days of creditable service and 53 days of time lost.

Army Regulation 635-209, in effect at the time, set forth the policy and prescribed procedures for eliminating enlisted personnel for unsuitability.  Action was to be taken to discharge an individual for unsuitability when, in the commander's opinion, it was clearly established that:  the individual was unlikely to develop sufficiently to participate in further military training and/or become a satisfactory soldier, or the individual's psychiatric or physical condition was such as to not warrant discharge for disability.  Unsuitability included inaptitude, character and behavior disorders, disorders of intelligence and transient personality disorders due to acute or special stress, apathy, defective attitude, and inability to expend effort constructively, enuresis, chronic alcoholism, and homosexuality.  Evaluation by a medical officer was required and, when psychiatric indications are involved, the medical officer must be a psychiatrist, if one was available.  A general or honorable discharge was considered appropriate.

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.  There is no record of the applicant serving more than 2 months and 16 days for which he was credited at the time of discharge.  His 53 days of recorded AWOL is lost time under Title 10, United States Code, and cannot be credited to the applicant as time served.

2.  Service medical records do not indicate that the applicant suffered a rheumatic heart valve, either prior to his enlistment or during service, as he alleges.  He was provided a complete separation physical examination on 
9 March 1965 and was found to be medically qualified for separation.

3.  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.

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

__rvo___  __sk_____  ___le___  DENY APPLICATION

						Karl F. Schneider
						Director, Army Review Boards Agency

INDEX

CASE ID	AR1999026900	
SUFFIX		
RECON		
DATE BOARDED	20000405	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE		
DATE OF DISCHARGE		
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY		
DISCHARGE REASON		
BOARD DECISION	DENY	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.	110.00	
2.	113.00	
3.	123.00	
4.	142.00	
5.		
6.