MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:   

	BOARD DATE:           30 October 2001                   
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR2001060156

	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	
	Mrs. Nancy Amos		Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Ms. Celia L. Adolphi		Chairperson	
	Mr. Arthur A. Omartian		Member	
	Mr. Harry B. Oberg		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:  That his discharge under other than honorable conditions (UOTHC) be upgraded to honorable.

APPLICANT STATES:  That he was told that he would have an honorable discharge after 5 years.  He has never heard anything.  He provides an Article 15 dated 9 February 1966 as supporting evidence.

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

He enlisted in the Regular Army on 24 February 1965.  He completed basic combat training.  He apparently academically failed advanced individual training for 15E (Pershing Missile Battery Crewman) and was sent to 12A (Pioneer) advanced individual training which he apparently completed.

The applicant accepted nonjudicial punishment under Article 15, Uniform Code of Military Justice on four different occasions for disciplinary infractions such as absenting himself from his unit, being drunk in uniform in a public place, and possessing an unauthorized identification card.

On 24 January 1966, the applicant received a psychiatric evaluation.  No psychiatric disease was found.  It was noted that he had a long history of trouble with authority figures to include home, school, police and now the service.  He was found to be mentally responsible, to be able to distinguish right from wrong and to adhere to the right, and to have the ability and mental capacity to understand and participate in board proceedings.  He was psychiatrically cleared for appropriate command action.

On 16 February 1966, the applicant completed a separation physical and was found qualified for separation.

On 3 March 1966, the applicant was convicted by a summary court-martial of absenting himself from his organization.  He was sentenced to confinement at hard labor for one month, suspended, and to forfeit $30.00 pay.

On 14 March 1966, the applicant’s commander recommended he be separated under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-208 for unfitness.

On 14 March 1966, the applicant was advised of the basis for the recommended action.  He declined counsel, did not request a hearing by a board of officers and elected not to submit a statement in his own behalf.

On 28 March 1966, the appropriate authority approved the recommendation and directed the applicant receive an Undesirable Discharge Certificate.

On 19 April 1966, the applicant was discharged, in pay grade E-1, under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-208 for unfitness with a discharge UOTHC.  He had completed 1 year, 1 month, and 26 days of creditable active service and no lost time. 

Army Regulation 635-208, in effect at the time, set forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel for unfitness.  The regulation provided for the discharge of individuals by reason of unfitness with an undesirable discharge when it had been determined that an individual’s military record was characterized by one of more of the following:  frequent incidents of a discreditable nature with civil or military authorities; sexual perversion; drug addiction or the unauthorized use or possession of habit forming narcotic drugs or marijuana; an established pattern for shirking; or an established pattern showing dishonorable failure to pay just debts.

The U. S. Army does not have, nor has it ever had, a policy to automatically upgrade discharges.  Each case is decided on its own merits when an applicant requests a change in discharge.  Changes may be warranted if the Board determines that the characterization of service or the reason for discharge or both were improper or inequitable.  The Defense Discharge Review Standards specifically stated that no factors should be established which would require automatic change or denial of a change in discharge.

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 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.

2.  The applicant's administrative separation was accomplished in compliance with applicable regulations with no indication of procedural errors which would tend to jeopardize his rights.  Considering his numerous infractions of military discipline, the characterization of his discharge as UOTHC was and still is appropriate.

3.  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

__cla___  __aao___  __hbo___  DENY APPLICATION

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

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2001060156	
SUFFIX		
RECON		
DATE BOARDED	20011030	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE	UOTHC	
DATE OF DISCHARGE	19660419	
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY	AR 64-208 	
DISCHARGE REASON	A51.00	
BOARD DECISION	(DENY)	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.	110.00	
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.