MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:       

	BOARD DATE:            11 July 2000
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR2000039132

	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. Raymond J. Wagner		Chairperson	
	Mr. John Saputo		Member	
	Mr. Roger Able		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 there were discrepancies in his case at the time of his discharge as a lieutenant wanted him to sign papers pleading guilty to an offense and to indicate that he would not reenlist in the Army.  He states that at the time of his court-martial, a captain testified that he had three article’s 15 and the statement was incorrect.  He goes on to state that the lieutenant really didn’t understand the pressure of being in a foreign country and that there was help available.  He states that the section chief testified that all that was needed was good supervision.  He concludes by stating that he really didn’t understand the court proceedings and that he served 2 years, 2 months and 4 days of a 3-year tour of duty and he believes that his discharge should be upgraded.  In support of his appeal he submits a copy of a sworn statement provided by a captain dated 8 July 1958, and a copy of a soldier’s affidavit dated 17 July 1958.  The statement and the affidavit both indicate that the applicant’s performance was outstanding before it deteriorated.

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 12 June 1956, he enlisted in the Army for 3 years and he successfully completed his training as an aidman.

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 15 August 1958, under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-208, undesirable habits and traits of character.  He had completed 2 years, 2 months and 4 days of total active service, and was issued an Undesirable Discharge Certificate.

There is no evidence in the available records that show that the applicant ever applied to the Army Discharge Review Board (ADRB) 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 having undesirable habits and traits of character.  Paragraph 2 of the regulation provided, in pertinent part, for the separation of personnel where there was evidence of misconduct.  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. There is no evidence of record to substantiate the applicant's claim that that he did not understand the proceedings surrounding his discharge.  The evidence of record clearly shows that he was discharged under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-208 for undesirable habits and traits of character and he was issued an undesirable discharge.

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

4.  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

___ra ___  ___js ___  __rjw____  DENY APPLICATION

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

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2000039132	
SUFFIX		
RECON		
DATE BOARDED	2000/07/11	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE	UD	
DATE OF DISCHARGE	1958/08/15	
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY	AR 635-208	
DISCHARGE REASON		
BOARD DECISION	DENY	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.  189	110.0000	
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.