MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:       

	BOARD DATE:            9 January 2001
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR2000044778

	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. Curtis L. Greenway		Member	
	Mr. Eric N. Andersen		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 be upgraded to honorable.

APPLICANT STATES:  The applicant offers no basis or argument in his application to the Board to support his request for an upgrade of his discharge.

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

He enlisted in Chicago, Illinois on 18 November 1965 for a period of 4 years, enlistment under the Buddy Plan, and for assignment to Europe. 

While attending his advanced individual training (AIT) at Fort Ord, California, nonjudicial punishment (NJP) was imposed against him on 15 March 1966 for being absent from his unit on 14 March 1966.  His punishment consisted of a forfeiture of pay, extra duty and restriction.  He completed his AIT as a light weapons infantryman and was transferred to Germany on 4 April 1966.

On 22 July 1966, NJP was imposed against him for his failure to go to his place of duty (guard duty).  His punishment consisted of a forfeiture of pay, extra duty and restriction.

On 20 December 1966, NJP was imposed against him for throwing an empty bottle against a wall and for disobeying a lawful order from a superior noncommissioned officer (NCO).  His punishment consisted of a reduction to the pay grade of E-2, a forfeiture of pay, extra duty and restriction.

The applicant had NJP imposed against him on 25 February 1967 for being absent without leave (AWOL) from 22 February to 23 February 1967.  His punishment consisted of a reduction to the pay grade of E-1, a forfeiture of pay, extra duty and restriction. 

He had NJP imposed against him on 26 May 1967 for being drunk while on guard duty.  His punishment consisted of extra duty and restriction.

On 2 January 1968, NJP was imposed against him for being drunk and disorderly at the recreation center.  His punishment consisted of a reduction to the pay grade of E-1, a forfeiture of pay, extra duty and restriction. 

The applicant went AWOL from Germany on 13 February and remained absent until he was returned to military control at Fort Knox, Kentucky on 16 February 1968.  He again went AWOL from 16 February to 17 February 1968.  He was convicted by a special court-martial on 5 April 1968 of being AWOL from 13 February to 16 February 1968, from 16 February to 17 February 1968 and of violating minimum custody by leaving his assigned area without proper authority. He plead guilty and was sentenced to confinement at hard labor for 6 months and a forfeiture of pay.  The convening authority approved the findings and sentence on 9 April 1968.  

Although the facts and circumstances surrounding his discharge are not present in the available records, his records do indicate that action was initiated on 22 April 1968 to separate the applicant from the service under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-212 for unfitness and that a waiver of hearing before a board of officers was granted to the applicant.  The appropriate authority (a brigadier general) approved the recommendation on 30 April 1968 and directed that he be furnished an Undesirable Discharge Certificate.

Accordingly, he was discharged under other than honorable conditions on 7 May 1968 under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-212, for unfitness based on his involvement in frequent incidents of a discreditable nature with military authorities.  He had served 2 years, 2 months and 26 days of total active service and had 84 days of lost time due to AWOL and confinement. 

There is no indication in the available records to show 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 635-212, in effect at the time, set forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel.  It provided, in pertinent part, that members who were involved in frequent incidents of a discreditable nature with civil and/or military authorities were subject to separation for unfitness.  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 accordance with applicable regulations with no procedural errors that would tend to jeopardize his rights.

2.  Accordingly, it must also be presumed that the type of discharge and the reasons therefore were appropriate considering the available facts of the case.

3.  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 this requirement.

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

___ena__  ___mdm _  __clg ___  DENY APPLICATION

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

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2000044778	
SUFFIX		
RECON	YYYYMMDD	
DATE BOARDED	2001/01/09	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE	UD	
DATE OF DISCHARGE	1968/05/07	
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY	AR 635-212	
DISCHARGE REASON	UNFITNESS	
BOARD DECISION	DENY	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.  592	144.5100/A51.00	
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.