MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:       

	BOARD DATE:            7 December 2000
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR2000043753

	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. Joseph A. Adriance		Analyst	

The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Mr. Raymond V. O’Connor, Jr.		Chairperson	
	Mr. Ernest W. Lutz, Jr.		Member	
	Mr. John P. Infante		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:  In effect, that his undesirable discharge (UD) be upgraded to either a general, under honorable conditions discharge (GD) or an honorable discharge (HD). 

APPLICANT STATES:  In effect, that his UD was unjust and a much more severe penalty than the circumstances dictated.  He feels that he is entitled to an upgrade of his discharge because he served his country honorably for a period of eight months after being drafted for service.  

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

The applicant’s military records were not available to the Board for review.  A fire destroyed approximately 18 million service members’ records at the National Personnel Records Center in 1973.  It is believed that the applicant’s records were lost in that fire.  

The evidence does include a Department of Defense Form 214 (Armed Forces of the United States Report of Transfer or Discharge) which documents the character and reason for the applicant’s discharge.  

The DD Form 214, which was authenticated by the applicant with his signature, confirms that he was inducted into the Army on 25 August 1958.  It also confirms that he received an UD on 17 December 1959, under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-208, by reason of unfitness-frequent incidents of a discreditable nature with civil or military authorities.

Additionally, the separation document verifies that the applicant served just eight months of creditable active military service and, during that tenure in service, never received any individual awards or decorations which cited him for any acts of valor, significant achievement, or service warranting special recognition.  This form also confirms that during his short term of service the applicant accrued 
237 days of time lost.

Army Regulation 635-208, in effect at the time, provided the authority for discharging enlisted personnel for unfitness.  Separation action was to be taken when the commander determined that the best interest of the service would be served by eliminating the individual concerned and reasonable attempts to rehabilitate or develop the individual to be a satisfactory soldier were unlikely to succeed or rehabilitation was impracticable.  Unfitness included frequent incidents of a discreditable nature with military or civil authorities and 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 Board noted the applicant’s contention that he believed his eight months of service should entitle him to an upgrade to his discharge.  However, after carefully examining the evidence, the Board finds this claim lacks merit.

2.  The applicant’s record is void of facts and circumstances concerning events that led to a discharge from the Army.  However, there is a properly constituted DD Form 214, which was authenticated by the applicant, on file.  This document identifies the reason for the applicant’s discharge as unfitness and the characterization of his service as under other than honorable conditions. 

3.  In the absence of evidence to the contrary, it is presumed that the discharge proceedings were conducted in accordance with law and regulations applicable at the time, and that the character of the applicant’s discharge is commensurate with his overall record 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

_ewl ____  __ewl___  ___jpi ___  DENY APPLICATION

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

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2000043753	
SUFFIX		
RECON		
DATE BOARDED	2000/12/07	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE	UD	
DATE OF DISCHARGE	1959/12/17	
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY	AR 635-208	
DISCHARGE REASON	Unfitness	
BOARD DECISION	DENY	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.  189	110.0000	
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.