MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:   

	BOARD DATE:                              
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR1999028938

	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. Carolyn G. Wade		Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Mr. 		Chairperson	
	Mr. 		Member	
	Mr. 		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, under honorable conditions discharge be upgraded to honorable.

APPLICANT STATES:  In effect, that due to his lack of education he was unable to enter the service on his own intellect; and that he feels the punishment was too harsh.

COUNSEL CONTENDS:  In effect, that the applicant’s age and lack of education impaired his ability to serve.

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

On 24 September 1964 the applicant enlisted in the Regular Army (RA) for a period of 3 years.  He enlisted for the Buddy Basic Training Plan Option.  At the time of enlistment the applicant was 17 years old and had an AFQT score of 48 (i.e., mental category III).  The applicant was assigned to Fort Jackson, South Carolina for one station unit training.  Upon completion of basic combat training and before completion of advanced individual training (AIT) the applicant departed his unit in an AWOL status.  

On 29 November 1964 the applicant departed his unit in an AWOL status and did remain so until on or about 4 January 1965.  The applicant was confined from 4 January until 14 January 1965.  On 15 January 1965 the applicant was convicted by a summary court-martial for the aforementioned period of AWOL.  He was sentenced to a forfeiture of $45.00.

Between 18-21 January 1965 and 24-28 January 1965 the applicant was again AWOL.  On 4 February 1965 the applicant was convicted by a summary court-martial for the two aforementioned specifications of AWOL.  He was sentenced to confinement at hard labor for 30 days and a forfeiture of $50.00.  The applicant was confined from 24 January until 23 February 1965.  

On 5 February 1965 his commanding officer requested a physical and psychiatric evaluation in accordance with the provisions of paragraph 8, AR 635-208.

On 12 February 1965 his commanding officer recommended the applicant be discharged from the Army under the provisions of paragraph 8, AR 635-208 with an undesirable discharge (UD) due to his record of repeated AWOL and his indication that further AWOL would result if he was not discharged.

After being counseled by his commanding officer, he authenticated a statement with his signature, in which he acknowledged notification of his commander’s intent, declined representation by legal counsel, and declined a board of officers hearing.

The intermediate commander interviewed the applicant and reviewed the proposed discharge action and recommended approval of the separation action with a UD.

On 18 February 1965 the appropriate authority approved the recommendation for discharge with a general, under honorable conditions discharge.  Accordingly, on 24 February 1965 the applicant was discharged from the Army after completing 2 months and 9 days of creditable military service and accruing 82 days of lost time.

Army Regulation 635-208, then in effect, provided in pertinent part the policies, procedures, and guidance for the prompt elimination of enlisted personnel who were determined to be unfit for further military service.  Individuals discharged under this regulation would normally be issued a UD.

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 provided no evidence that his age or level of maturity impaired his ability to be a good soldier or that he was any less mature than other soldiers of the same age who successfully completed military service.

3.  The evidence of record indicates the command attempted to assist the applicant in performing and conducting himself according to Army standards by providing him counseling and two summary courts-martial.  The applicant failed to respond appropriately to these efforts.

4.  The applicant by continuing his pattern of misconduct and poor duty performance left his commanding officer no choice but to initiate separation action.

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

________  ________  ________  DENY APPLICATION

						Karl F. Schneider
						Director, Army Review Boards Agency

INDEX

CASE ID	AR1999028938	
SUFFIX		
RECON		
DATE BOARDED	200003DD	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE	GD	
DATE OF DISCHARGE	19650218	
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY	AR 635-208	
DISCHARGE REASON	9229	
BOARD DECISION	DENY	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.A93.01		
2.A93.03		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.