MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:       

	BOARD DATE:            27 June 2000
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR2000038322

	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. Mark D. Manning		Chairperson	
	Mr. Walter T. Morrison		Member	
	Mr. Curtis L. Greenway		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.  

APPLICANT STATES:  In effect, that he was unjustly discharged without the benefit of proper counseling as to his rights in the matter by proper counsel.  He further states that he attempted to transfer out of the company and was informed by the commander who did not like him, that he (the applicant) was a potential criminal that should be jailed.  He further states that all attempts to transfer from the unit failed and that his record of promotions early in his career should show that it was simply that his commander did not like him.  He also states that he has been punished enough for one commander’s feelings and he now desires an upgrade of his discharge.    

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

He enlisted in Denver, Colorado on 15 June 1963 for a period of 3 years.  He successfully completed his training and was transferred to Fort Carson, Colorado on 5 November 1963 for duty as a lineman.  He was promoted to the pay grade of E-4 on 2 July 1964.

He was convicted by a summary court-martial on 12 January 1965 of unlawfully entering a mess hall and disobeying a lawful order from a superior NCO.  He was sentenced to a forfeiture of pay and restriction.

On 23 February 1965 nonjudicial punishment (NJP) was imposed against him for failure to go to his place of duty (guard mount).  His punishment consisted of a reduction to the pay grade of E-3, a forfeiture of pay, extra duty, and restriction.

On 4 June 1965, NJP was imposed against him for being AWOL from 21 May to 31 May 1965.  His punishment consisted of a reduction to the pay grade of E-2, a forfeiture of pay, extra duty and restriction.

The applicant’s commander initiated action to bar him from reenlistment on 16 June 1965.  He cited as the basis for his recommendation the applicant’s disciplinary record, his poor duty performance, poor off-duty habits, failure to meet minimum standards, and his failure to respond to numerous counseling sessions and rehabilitative efforts.  The applicant acknowledged that he understood the allegations against him and elected not to submit a statement in his own behalf.  The appropriate authority approved the bar to reenlistment on 20 July 1965.

He was convicted by a special court-martial on 29 July 1965 of being AWOL from 6 July to 12 July 1965.  He was sentenced to confinement at hard labor for 2 months and a forfeiture of pay.

The facts and circumstances surrounding the applicant’s administrative discharge are not present in the available records; however, his records do contain a duly constituted report of separation (DD Form 214), signed by the applicant, which shows that he was discharged under other than honorable conditions on 11 October 1965, under the provisions of Army Regulation        635-208, for unfitness due to frequent involvement in incidents of a discreditable nature with civil and/or military authorities.  He had served 2 years, 1 month, and 7 days of total active service and had 82 days of lost time due to AWOL and confinement.

There is no evidence in the available records to show that he 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 the absence of evidence to the contrary, it must be presumed that the applicant’s administrative separation was accomplished in compliance with applicable regulations with no violations or procedural errors which would tend to jeopardize his rights.

2.  Accordingly, the type of discharge directed and the reasons therefor were appropriate considering all of the available facts of the case.

3.  The applicant’s contentions have been noted by the Board.  However, given the seriousness of his offenses and his otherwise undistinguished record of service, they are not sufficiently mitigating to warrant an upgrade of his discharge.

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 that 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

__wtm___  __mdm__  ___clg __  DENY APPLICATION

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

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2000038322	
SUFFIX		
RECON		
DATE BOARDED	2000/06/27	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE	(UD)	
DATE OF DISCHARGE	1965/10/11	
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY	AR635-208/fi (unfit)	
DISCHARGE REASON	592	
BOARD DECISION	DENY	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.  592	144.5100/A51.00	
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.