MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:       

	BOARD DATE:            4 May 2000
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR2000035313

	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. Carl W. S. Chun		Director	
	Mr. Jessie B. Strickland		Analyst	

The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Mr. Luther L. Santiful		Chairperson	
	Mr. James P. Steuve		Member	
	Mr. Carol Jo Suiter		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 dishonorable discharge be upgraded to a better discharge.

APPLICANT STATES:  In effect, that he admits the mistakes that led to his dishonorable discharge; however, for the last 44 years he has been a good citizen, raised a family, owned his own business and held down good jobs, and is a good man that is respected by many people.  He goes on to state that he is now 63 years of age and on his own, that he has medical problems, that he lives solely on his Social Security and disability payments of $1100.00 per month, that he needs to reduce his rent, and that he needs an upgrade of his discharge so that he can get on the housing list in his county to reduce his rent.  In support of his application he submits four unofficial third party statements in support of his character.  

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

The applicant enlisted in Cleveland, Ohio on 31 March 1954 for a period of 3 years.  He successfully completed his training and was transferred to the Canal Zone on 25 August 1954 for duty as a vehicle driver.  He was promoted to the pay grade of E-3 on 18 February 1955.

On 14 July 1955 he was convicted by a special court-martial of the wrongful appropriation and damage through neglect of a government sedan (1951 Chevrolet).  He was sentenced to confinement at hard labor for 6 months and a forfeiture of pay.  

On 16 September 1955, while serving his confinement, he was convicted by a general court-martial of disobeying a lawful command of a commissioned officer. He was sentenced to confinement at hard labor for a period of 2 years, total forfeiture of all pay and allowances, and a dishonorable discharge.  The convening authority approved the findings and sentence of the general         court-martial on 24 October 1955.  

The applicant was transferred to the Branch U.S. Disciplinary Barracks in New Cumberland, Pennsylvania pending appellate review of his case.  On 6 December 1955 orders were published which affirmed only so much of his sentence as provided for a dishonorable discharge, forfeiture of all pay and allowances, and confinement at hard labor for 1 year.

On 19 December 1955 he was dishonorably discharged pursuant to the sentence of a general court-martial.  He had served 1 year, 3 months, and 13 days of total active service and had 159 days of lost time due to confinement.

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.  Trial by court-martial was warranted by the gravity of the offenses charged.  Conviction and discharge were effected in accordance with applicable law and regulations, and the discharge appropriately characterizes the misconduct for which the applicant was convicted.

2.  The type of discharge directed and the reasons therefore appear to be appropriate considering the available facts of the case.

3.  The applicant’s contentions and supporting documents have been noted by the Board.  However, they are not sufficiently mitigating to warrant relief when compared to his otherwise undistinguished record of service during such a short period of time.

4.  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.

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

__cs____  ___ls ___  __jps____  DENY APPLICATION

						Karl F. Schneider
						Director, Army Review Boards Agency

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2000035313	
SUFFIX		
RECON		
DATE BOARDED	2000/05/04	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE	DD	
DATE OF DISCHARGE	1955/12/19	
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY	GCM	
DISCHARGE REASON	676/GCM	
BOARD DECISION	DENY	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.  675	144.6800/DD/GCM	
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.