MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF: 

	BOARD DATE:  29 March 2001
	DOCKET NUMBER:  AR2000050673

	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. John N. Slone		Chairperson	
	Mr. Christopher J. Prosser		Member	
	Mr. Lester Echols		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 general.

APPLICANT STATES:  In effect, that he received an undesirable discharge because he could not adjust to military life, that he has turned his life around, and that he would appreciate that this Board remove the black mark off of his life for his standing in the community.  He also states that he now has membership in the Veterans of Foreign Wars (VFW) and the American Veterans and is ashamed to tell his family that he does not have an honorable discharge.  In support of his application he submits a copy of his DD Form 214 (Report of Transfer or Discharge) and a copy of his VA Form 21-4138 (Statement in Support of Claim).

EVIDENCE OF RECORD: The applicant's military records show he enlisted in the Ohio Army National Guard (OHARNG) on 31 July 1956 as an armor 
crewman.  He was ordered to active duty for training (ADT) on 7 September 1957, was released from ADT on 6 March 1958, and returned to control of the OHARNG.  He was honorably discharged from the OHARNG on 9 April 1959. 
He enlisted on 20 April 1959 as a field artillery basic.  He continued to serve until he was honorably discharged on 28 May 1961 in order to reenlist.  He reenlisted on 29 May 1961.

He was convicted by two summary and one special courts-martial of being drunk and disorderly, of disobeying a lawful order from his superior non-commissioned officer, of being AWOL from 1 to 20 November 1961 (19 days) and from 27 December 1961 to 22 January 1962 (26 days).  His sentence consisted of a forfeiture of pay, confinement, and a reduction to the pay grade of E-1.

The applicant underwent a separation medical examination on 25 January 1962
and was found qualified for separation.

The facts and circumstances pertaining to the applicant’s discharge are not present in the available records.  However, his DD Form 214 shows that on 28 February 1962, he was discharged under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-208, for frequent incidents of a discreditable nature with military authorities.
He was furnished an Undesirable Discharge Certificate.  He had a total of
4 years, 9 months and 28 days of creditable service and had 58 days of lost time due to AWOL and confinement.

There is no evidence that the applicant applied to the Army Discharge Review Board for an upgrade of his discharge within its 15-year statute of limitations.

Army Regulation 635-208, then in effect, set forth the policy for administrative separation for unfitness (misconduct).  Action to separate an individual was to be taken when, in the judgement of the commander, it was clearly established that rehabilitation was impractical or was unlikely to produce a satisfactory soldier.  When separation for unfitness was warranted, an undesirable discharge was normally issued.

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; however, there is no evidence in the available records, and the applicant has provided no evidence 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

__js___  __cp______  ___le___  DENY APPLICATION

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

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2000050673	
SUFFIX		
RECON	YYYYMMDD	
DATE BOARDED	20010329	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE	UD	
DATE OF DISCHARGE	19620228	
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY	AR 635-208	
DISCHARGE REASON		
BOARD DECISION	DENY	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.  189		
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.