MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:       

	BOARD DATE:            18 July 2000
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR2000036685

	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	
	Ms. Deyon D. Battle		Analyst	

The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Mr. George D. Paxson		Chairperson	
	Ms. Elizabeth Buchanon		Member	
	Ms. Margaret V. Thompson		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 an honorable discharge.

APPLICANT STATES:  That he does not believe that he was given a fair hearing because he was not given enough time to prepare his defense.  He states that he was given less than 1 day to prepare to appear before a board of officers and that there was only one witness called by the board.  He further states that he was not treated fairly because his counsel did not get in touch with him until the morning of the hearing and he did not do much for him as nothing from his 201 File was used in his defense.  He also states that he never received a copy of the board of officers proceedings and he would like to be furnished a copy.  In support of his appeal, he submits a copy of a letter dated 22 January 1958 directing him to appear before a board of officers, a copy of a Letter of Appreciation dated 21 October 1957, a Certificate of Achievement dated 27 April 1956, a copy of his discharge orders dated 19 February 1958, a copy of a DD Form 215 (Correction to DD Form 214) dated 2 May 1958 and a copy of a DD Form 215 dated 9 June 1999.

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 alternate sources.

He enlisted in the Army on 1 February 1950 and he successfully completed his training as a military policeman.  

He was honorably discharged on 31 March 1954 and reenlisted in the Army for 6 years on 1 April 1954.

The available records show that a board of officers convened on 23 January 1958 to determine whether or not the applicant should be discharged prior to the expiration of his term of service.  However, the board’s determination is not available for review.

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 21 February 1958, under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-209, for unsuitability.  He had completed 8 years and 21 days of total active service and was issued a General Discharge Certificate.

There is no evidence of record that shows 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 635-209, in effect at the time, set forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel for unsuitability.  Paragraph 3 of the regulation provided, in pertinent part, for the separation of personnel where there was evidence of inaptitude, character and behavior disorders, apathy, enuresis, alcoholism, or homosexuality.

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.  There is no evidence of record, nor has the applicant submitted any evidence to substantiate his contention that he was treated unfairly at the time of his discharge.  The available evidence clearly shows that a board of officers convened on 23 January 1958 to determine whether or not he should be discharged for unsuitability prior the expiration of his term of service.  In the absence of evidence to the contrary, it must be presumed that what the Army did in his case was correct.

3.  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

__gp____  __mvt___  ___eb___  DENY APPLICATION

		    Carl W. S. Chun
		    Director, Army Board for Correction
    of Military Records

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2000036685	
SUFFIX		
RECON		
DATE BOARDED	2000/07/18	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE	GD	
DATE OF DISCHARGE	1958/02/21	
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY	AR 635-209	
DISCHARGE REASON	547	
BOARD DECISION	DENY	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.  730	144.7800/A78.00/unsuitability	
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.