MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:        

	BOARD DATE:            12 January 2000
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR1999028310

	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.

	Ms. Deyon D. Battle		Analyst	

	The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Mr. John N. Slone		Chairperson	
	Ms. Irene N. Wheelwright		Member	
	Mr. Luther L. Santiful		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 undesirable discharge be upgraded to an honorable or a general discharge.

APPLICANT STATES:  That he believes that his discharge is unjust because of a decision made by an NCO which set off a chain of events that he did not understand because of his youth and naivete.  He further states that he was court-martialed for being too drunk to perform guard duty and for missing bed check.  In support of his appeal he submits an undated letter from the Assistant Pastor and a letter dated 19 April 1999 from the Senior Pastor of the Milton Avenue Baptist Church both attesting to his good post-service conduct.

EVIDENCE OF RECORD:  The applicant's military records were lost or destroyed in the National Personnel Records Center fire of 1973.  Information herein was obtained from reconstructed personnel records.

He was inducted in the Army at age 17 on 10 February 1955 and he successfully completed his training as an anti-aircraft artillery weapons crewman.

The facts and circumstances pertaining to the applicant's discharge are not on file.  The Report of Transfer or Discharge, DD Form 214, indicates that the applicant was discharged on 4 February 1957, under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-208, for habits and traits of character manifested by misconduct. He had 1 year, 11 months and 23 days of total active service and was issued an Undesirable Discharge Certificate.

The is no evidence in the available records that 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 635-208, in effect at the time, set forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel having undesirable habits and traits of character.  Paragraph 2 of the regulation provided, in pertinent part, for the separation of personnel where there was evidence of misconduct.  An undesirable discharge was normally 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.  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.  While the Board has taken cognizance of the applicant's good post-service conduct and his youth and immaturity at the time of his induction; none of these factors, either individually or in sum, warrant the relief requested.

3.  His DD Form 214 shows that he was discharged under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-208 for habits and traits of character manifested by misconduct and he admits to being court-martialed on at least two occasions.  In the absence of evidence to the contrary, it must be presumed that what the Army did in his case was correct and that his discharge was appropriately characterized.

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

___js____  __inw ___  __ls ____  DENY APPLICATION

						Karl F. Schneider
				      Director, Army Review Boards Agency

INDEX

CASE ID	AR1999028310	
SUFFIX		
RECON		
DATE BOARDED	2000/01/12	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE	UD	
DATE OF DISCHARGE	1957/02/04	
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY	AR 635-208	
DISCHARGE REASON	626	
BOARD DECISION	DENY	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.  731	144.7900/A79.00	
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.