MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:  

	BOARD DATE:  19 December 2000
	DOCKET NUMBER:  AR2000046292

	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. Joyce A. Wright		Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Mr. James P. Huber		Chairperson	
	Mr. Kenneth L. Wright		Member	
	Mr. Raymond J. Wagner		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:  That he was told at the time of his discharge that he could have his discharge upgraded to honorable.  He also states that he attempted to get this done after his return to Cadiz, Ohio.  He further states that he asked for assistance from the local draft board and from his pastor. 
In support of his application he submits a copy of his DD Form 214 (Report of Transfer or Discharge). 

EVIDENCE OF RECORD:  The applicant's military records show he initially enlisted in the USAR on 12 November 1956.  He continued to serve until he was honorably discharged on 29 July 1958 in order to enlisted in the Regular Army.  He enlisted on 30 July 1958. 

Evidence of record shows that he was convicted by one summary and one special court-martial for instances of being AWOL from 6 March 1961 to 7 March 1961 (1 day), for violation of a lawful general regulation and assault.  His punishment consisted of a forfeiture of pay and confinement at hard labor for
5 months.

The facts and circumstances pertaining to the applicant’s discharge are not present in the available records.  However, his DD Form 214 which is authenticated in his own hand, shows that on 5 May 1961, he was discharged under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-208, for undesirable habits or traits of character.  He was furnished an Undesirable Discharge Certificate.  He had 
2 years, 7 months and 15 days of creditable service and 52 days of lost time due to AWOL and confinement.

The applicant applied to the Army Discharge Review Board (ADRB) for an upgrade of his discharge on 2 June 1962.  The ADRB determined that his discharge was proper and denied his request on 27 July 1962.

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 an antisocial or amoral
trend, chronic alcoholism, drug addiction, pathological lying, or 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 Board notes the applicant’s contention that he was told that at the time of his discharge that he could have his discharge upgraded to honorable.  However, there is no evidence in the available records, and the applicant has provided no evidence, to support his contentions or to show that his discharge was unjust and should be upgraded.

2.  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 procedural errors, which would tend to jeopardize his rights.

3.  The type of separation directed and the reasons for that separation were 
appropriate considering all of the available facts of the case.

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 this 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

__jh____  ___kw___  ___rw____  DENY APPLICATION

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

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2000046292	
SUFFIX		
RECON	YYYYMMDD	
DATE BOARDED	20001219	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE	UOTHC	
DATE OF DISCHARGE	199610505	
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY	AR 635-208	
DISCHARGE REASON		
BOARD DECISION	DENY	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.  189		
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.