MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:   

	BOARD DATE:           24 January 2002                            
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR2001062565

	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. Judy Blanchard-Miller		Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Mr. George D. Paxson		Chairperson	
	Mr. Walter T. Morrison		Member	
	Mr. Richard T. Dunbar		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 honorable conditions (GD) be upgraded to an honorable discharge. 

APPLICANT STATES:  That alcohol caused his discharge.   

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

On 2 November 1960, the applicant reenlisted in the Regular Army for a period of 3 years with 11 years, 1 month and 27 days of prior active service.  His military occupational specialty was 141.67 (Field Artillery Crewman).  On 15 February 1961, the applicant was promoted to staff sergeant E-6.

On 5 August 1961, the applicant was convicted by a summary court-martial of being absent without leave (AWOL).  He was sentenced to a reduction to pay grade E-5.  The applicant’s record also indicates that he went AWOL on two more occasions, however, the particulars are missing from his file.

The applicant’s record indicates that he initially was referred to the mental hygiene clinic in connection with his enuresis and excessive alcohol intake in June 1961.  However, on 29 August 1961, while being interviewed by a psychiatrist a certain amount of evidence was found that the applicant had been increasingly depressed for approximately one year.  The applicant told the psychiatrist about his suicidal thoughts even to the point of planning to injure himself.  Because of the possibility of suicide he was admitted into the hospital for observation.  

On 22 September 1961, the applicant was discharged from the hospital with a diagnosis of passive-dependency reaction, chronic, moderate to severe, manifested by severe alcohol excess and depressive features.  The applicant was found unsuitable for further military service and expeditious separation under Army Regulation 635-209, was strongly recommended.     

On 29 September 1961, the commander notified the applicant that he was being recommended for discharge under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-209, for unsuitability, (character and behavior disorders) with a general discharge.  The applicant was advised by legal counsel of the basis for the contemplated separation action and the rights available to him.  The applicant waived personal appearance, consideration, and representation by counsel before a board of officers.  He was afforded the opportunity to submit statements in his own behalf, but declined to do so.  The appropriate authority approved the recommendation and directed the issuance of a general discharge.  

On 6 November 1961, the applicant was discharged in pay grade E-4, under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-209 for unsuitability with a general discharge. He had completed 11 months and 27 days of creditable active service during this enlistment and 8 days of lost time. 
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 635-209, in effect, set forth the basic authority for separation of enlisted personnel for unsuitability.  That regulation provided, in pertinent part, that commanders would separate a member when, in the commander’s judgment, it was clearly established that the member would not develop sufficiently to become a satisfactory soldier.  When separation for unsuitability was approved a GD 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 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 discharge proceedings were conducted in accordance with law and regulations applicable at the time.  The character of the discharge is commensurate with the applicant’s overall record of military service.

3.  Therefore 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

__gdp___  __wtm___  __rtd___  DENY APPLICATION

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

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2001062565	
SUFFIX		
RECON		
DATE BOARDED	20020124	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE	(GD)	
DATE OF DISCHARGE	19611106	
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY	AR635-209.  .  .  .  .  	
DISCHARGE REASON	A40.00	
BOARD DECISION	(DENY)	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.	144.4000	
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.