MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:       

	BOARD DATE:            13 June 2000
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR2000037100

	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:

	Ms. Elizabeth Buchanon		Chairperson	
	Mr. John H. Kern		Member	
	Ms. Barbara J. Ellis		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 was young and immature at the time of his discharge and that he had never drank alcohol before in his life.  He states that he was enticed without knowing that the drink offered to him contained alcohol and he did not realize the consequences behind drinking.  He further states that his lack of education also contributed to his situation.  In support of his appeal, he submits letters from two of his associates dated 8 January and 14 January 2000 attesting to his character.

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.

On 29 January 1955, he enlisted in the Army for 3 years with an 8th grade education at age 17.  He successfully completed his training as a light weapons infantryman.

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 13 December 1957, under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-208 for unfitness based on repeated military offenses not warranting trial by court-martial.  He had completed 2 years, 7 months and 10 days of total active service and he had 95 days of lost time.  He was issued an Undesirable 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 635-208, in effect at the time, set forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel by reason of unfitness for those individuals involved in frequent incidents of a discreditable nature with civil or military authorities.  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.  Although the facts and circumstances surrounding the applicant’s discharge are unavailable for review, the evidence of record clearly shows that he had 95 days of lost time and that he was discharged for unfitness.  While he has provided statements attesting to his post-service character, they are not sufficiently mitigating to warrant the relief requested.

3.  His contention that he was young and immature at the time of his discharge has been noted by the Board.  However, his age at the time of his discharge is also not sufficiently mitigating to warrant the relief requested and he has failed to submit any evidence to show that an error or injustice exists.

4.  In the absence of evidence to the contrary, it must be presumed that what the Army did in his case was correct.

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

___jhk___  ___eb___  __be____  DENY APPLICATION

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

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2000037100	
SUFFIX		
RECON		
DATE BOARDED	2000/06/13	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE	UD	
DATE OF DISCHARGE	1957/12/13	
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY	AR 635-208	
DISCHARGE REASON	583	
BOARD DECISION	DENY	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.  708 	144.7100/A71.00/AWOL	
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.