MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:      

	BOARD DATE:           15 January 2002                  
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR2001061040

	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:

	Ms. Irene N. Wheelwright		Chairperson	
	Mr. Hubert O. Fry, Jr.		Member	
	Mr. Donald P. Hupman, Jr.		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 a general discharge (under honorable conditions).

APPLICANT STATES:  In effect, that his father was killed prior to the applicant’s
entering the service, that there were no jobs available at that time, and that he had a mother and five brothers and sisters at home with no one to care for them. He decided to enter the service and began an allotment for support of his mother to care for the family.  After two months in service his mother became ill, which left the family with no means of support.  He departed absent without leave (AWOL) and returned home and obtained a job to support the family.   He states that after his mother’s health improved, he returned to his unit to face the consequences.  He informed his unit that he departed AWOL due to hardship and was informed by his command that if he signed his discharge in their presence, he would receive a hardship discharge.  He states that he was not aware until 25 June 2001, that he had received an under other than honorable conditions discharge.  In support of his application, he submits three character references and a copy of his DD Form 214 (Report of Transfer or Discharge).

EVIDENCE OF RECORD:  The applicant's military records show he enlisted on 19 April 1963, as a light weapons infantryman.

He was convicted by two special courts-martial of being AWOL from 20 September to 10 October 1963 (21 days), and from 5 to 13 January 1964 
(8 days).  His sentences consisted of forfeitures of pay and confinement at hard labor for a total of 10 months.

The applicant underwent a separation medical examination on 4 February 1964, and was found qualified for separation.

The applicant underwent a psychiatric evaluation on 5 February 1964, which diagnosed him as having an inadequate personality, chronic, moderate; manifested by two AWOLs resulting from a negative attitude towards service, inability to tolerate group living or authority, and school failure.  The psychiatrist determined that he could distinguish right from wrong, possessed the mental capacity to participate in administrative or judicial proceedings, and that the applicant had no disqualifying mental defects sufficient to warrant disposition through medical channels.

On 6 February 1964, the applicant’s commander submitted a recommendation to separate the applicant from the service under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-208, for unfitness.  He cited as the basis for his recommendation the applicant’s frequent incidents of a discreditable nature with military authorities.  

After consulting with counsel, the applicant waived consideration of his case by a board of officers, representation by counsel, and elected not to submit a statement in his own behalf.  In doing so, he acknowledged that he might encounter substantial prejudice in civilian life and might be ineligible for many or all benefits administered by the Veterans Administration (VA) if an undesirable discharge (under other than honorable conditions) were issued.  The applicant initialed and signed his statement of waiver and retained a copy of his waiver statement.

On 24 February 1964, the appropriate authority approved the recommendation 
for discharge and directed that he be furnished an Undesirable Discharge Certificate.  The applicant was discharged on 3 March 1964.  He had a total 
of 6 months, and 2 days of creditable service and had 135 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 contentions that he was unaware that his discharge was undesirable (under other than honorable conditions) and assumed that he had received a hardship discharge.  However, the evidence of record shows that he initialed and signed his statement of waiver and retained a copy of this waiver.

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.  

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

_inw____  __dph___  _hof____   DENY APPLICATION

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

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2001061040	
SUFFIX		
RECON	YYYYMMDD	
DATE BOARDED	20020115	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE	UD	
DATE OF DISCHARGE	19630303	
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY	AR 635-208	
DISCHARGE REASON		
BOARD DECISION	DENY	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.  189		
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.