MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:       

	BOARD DATE:            14 September 2000
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR2000039714

	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. Raymond V. O’Connor, Jr.		Chairperson	
	Ms. Margaret K. Patterson		Member	
	Mr. Elzey J. Arledge, Jr.		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 honorable.

APPLICANT STATES:  In effect, that he went AWOL because he had to feed his brothers and sisters because his father would not and because the Army did not pay him enough to do so.

EVIDENCE OF RECORD:  The applicant's military records were destroyed in the 1973 fire at the National Personnel Records Center in St. Louis, Missouri which destroyed millions of service records.  However, information obtained from alternate sources show:

He enlisted in Beckley, West Virginia on 4 March 1954 for a period of 3 years.  His record of separation (DD Form 214) indicates that he completed no service schools or training courses and that he was convicted by summary court-martials on 13 August 1954 and 11 February 1955 for being AWOL from 2 July to 3 August 1954 and from 6 October 1954 to 14 January 1955.  In both instances he was sentenced to confinement at hard labor for 30 days and a forfeiture of pay.

On 12 February 1955 he underwent a complete mental examination and was found to be mentally responsible.  The examining neuro-psychiatrist recommended that the applicant be discharged under the provisions of Army Regulation 315-368 because of habit and traits not becoming the military service.

The applicant was notified on 15 February 1955 that he was to appear before a board of officers to determine if he should be separated from the service for unfitness.

On 16 February 1955 he appeared before a board of officers who determined that he should be discharged under other than honorable conditions for unfitness under the provisions of Army Regulation 615-368.

Accordingly, he was discharged under other than honorable conditions on 4 March 1955 under the provisions of Army Regulation 615-368 for unfitness.  He had served 8 months and 2 days of total active service and had 216 days of lost time due to AWOL and confinement.

Army Regulation 615-368, in effect at the time, set forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel by reason of unfitness.  That regulation provided for the discharge of individuals who had demonstrated their unfitness by giving evidence of habits and traits of character manifested by 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.  The applicant’s administrative separation was accomplished in compliance with applicable regulations with no indication of procedural errors which would tend to jeopardize his rights.

2.  The type of discharge directed and the reasons therefor were appropriate even given the limited information contained in the available records.

3.  The applicant’s contentions have been noted by the Board.  However, they are not supported by the available evidence of record.  Accordingly, his contentions are not sufficiently mitigating when compared to the extensive amount of lost time he accumulated in such a short amount of service.

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

__eja____  __mkp __  ___rvo __  DENY APPLICATION

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

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2000039714	
SUFFIX		
RECON		
DATE BOARDED	2000/09/14	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE	UD	
DATE OF DISCHARGE	1955/04/04	
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY	AR615-368	
DISCHARGE REASON	592	
BOARD DECISION	DENY	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.  592	144.5100/A51.00	
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.