MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:   

	BOARD DATE:           13 March 2001     
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR2000048987

	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. Wanda L. Waller		Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Ms. June Hajjar		Chairperson	
	Mr. Donald P. Hupman		Member	
	Mr. John T. Meixell		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 discharge under other than honorable conditions be upgraded to honorable.  

APPLICANT STATES:  That clemency is warranted because it is an injustice for him to continue to suffer the adverse consequences of a bad discharge.  He has been a good citizen since his discharge and he has been employed as a barber for 27 years.  He contends that he was immature and stupid.  In support of his application, he submits a letter of explanation.  

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

At age 17, with parental consent, the applicant enlisted on 30 December 1957 for a period of 3 years.  He successfully completed basic and advanced individual training and was transferred to Fort Bragg, North Carolina, for duty as a rifleman.
He was honorably discharged on 17 August 1958 for immediate reenlistment for a period of 4 years.  

On 26 November 1958 the applicant was convicted by a summary court-martial (SCM) of being AWOL from 9 October 1958 to 20 October 1958.  His punishment consisted of 45 days of hard labor without confinement and a forfeiture of pay.

On 1 May 1959 the applicant was convicted by a special court-martial of two specifications of being AWOL (11 February 1959 to 8 March 1959; and 21 March 1959 to 23 March 1959).  He was sentenced to be confined at hard labor for 6 months and to forfeit $50 pay per month for 6 months.  On 8 May 1959 the convening authority approved the sentence.

On 27 November 1959 the applicant was convicted by a SCM of failure to go to his appointed place of duty.  His punishment consisted of 30 days of hard labor without confinement and a forfeiture of pay.

The applicant’s records show that nonjudicial punishment was imposed against the applicant for being AWOL for one day.  His punishment consisted of 14 days of extra duty.

On 9 December 1959 the applicant underwent a separation medical examination and was found qualified for separation with a physical profile of 111111.  He also underwent a psychiatric evaluation and was cleared for administrative separation.

The facts and circumstances surrounding the applicant’s discharge are not present in the available records.  However, his records indicate that on 6 January 

1960 he was discharged under other than honorable conditions under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-208 for unfitness due to frequent incidents of a discreditable nature with civil or military authorities.  He had served 1 year,
8 months and 26 days of total active service and had 101 days lost time due to AWOL and confinement.

There is no evidence that the applicant applied to the Army Discharge Review Board for upgrade of his discharge within its 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 for unfitness.  Section II of the regulation provided, in pertinent part, for the separation of personnel for frequent involvement in incidents of a discreditable nature with civil or military authorities.  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 separation under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-208 was administratively correct and in conformance with applicable regulations.

2.  The type of discharge directed and the reasons for separation appear to be appropriate.
 
3.  The Board considered the applicant’s contentions regarding his post service conduct.  However, good post service conduct alone is not a basis for upgrading a discharge.

4.  The applicant failed to convince the Board through the evidence submitted or the evidence of record that his discharge was unjust and should be upgraded.

5.  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.

6.  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______  DPH____  JTM_____  DENY APPLICATION

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

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2000048987	
SUFFIX		
RECON		
DATE BOARDED	20010313	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE	(UOTHC)	
DATE OF DISCHARGE	19600106	
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY	AR 635-208  	
DISCHARGE REASON	Unfitness	
BOARD DECISION	(DENY)	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.	110.0200	
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.