MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:  

	BOARD DATE:  11 June 2002
	DOCKET NUMBER:  AR2002066831

	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	
	Mr. Vic Whitney		Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Mr. Fred N. Eichorn		Chairperson	
	Mr. Harry B.Oberg		Member	
	Mr. Roger W. Able		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 undesirable discharge be upgraded to an honorable type discharge.

APPLICANT STATES:  That he was young and foolish at the time and did not understand the consequences of the discharge he received.  He is now disabled and believes that enough time has passed to upgrade his discharge.

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

He entered active duty at 20 years of age on 25 September 1961.  He completed field artillery training and was assigned to Fort Meade, Maryland.  On 16 August 1962, he was convicted by a special court-martial of two specifications of absence without leave (AWOL) for a total of 54 days.  The approved sentence included confinement at hard labor for 4 months and a forfeiture of pay.

On 18 February 1963 he was punished under Article 15, Uniform Code of Military Justice, for absence from his place of duty.  On 22 March 1963 the applicant was AWOL again.  He was apprehended by civilian authorities on 25 March 1963 and charged with contributing to the delinquency of a minor.  He was returned to military control on 26 March 1963.  On 22 April 1963, he was convicted by a special court-martial of wrongful appropriation of an automobile of a fellow soldier and 4 days AWOL.  The approved sentence included confinement at hard labor for 6 months, a forfeiture of pay, and reduction to pay grade E-1.

A 17 May 1963 mental hygiene consultation resulted in a diagnosis of passive-aggressive reaction, manifested by immaturity, poorly controlled hostility, and manipulative behavior.  The condition was considered to be a character and behavior disorder not a medical condition amenable to hospitalization or treatment.

On 28 May 1963, the applicant waived his rights to a hearing before a board of officers and to submit statements in his own behalf concerning the commander's intent to recommend he be separated for unfitness.  He also declined to meet with counsel.  The applicant also acknowledged that he might receive an undesirable discharge and may be deprived of many or all rights as a veteran under Federal and state laws.

On 29 May 1963, the commander forwarded the recommendation that the applicant be separated for unfitness based on his marginal performance and unsatisfactory conduct.  The separation authority, a major general, approved the request and directed issuance of an undesirable discharge.  Effective 17 July 1963, the applicant was separated under authority of Army Regulation 635-208.  He had 1 year, 3 months, and 1 day creditable service and 204 days lost time due to AWOL and confinement.

Army Regulation 635-208, in effect at the time, provided the authority for discharging enlisted personnel for unfitness.  Separation action was to be taken when the commander determined that the best interest of the service would be served by eliminating the individual concerned and reasonable attempts to rehabilitate or develop the individual to be a satisfactory soldier were unlikely to succeed.  Unfitness included frequent incidents of a discreditable nature with military or civil authorities and an established pattern of shirking.  An undesirable discharge was normally considered appropriate.

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

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 applicant was advised of the effects of a discharge under other than honorable conditions and that he might be deprived of many or all Army and Federal benefits.  He was afforded the opportunity to submit statements in his own behalf, but he declined to do so.

2.  The applicant's contention that he was young and immature at the time is not sufficiently mitigating to warrant relief.  The Board notes that the applicant was almost 21 years of age at the time of his first AWOL.  While the Board is empathetic, the applicant's personal problems are not sufficiently mitigating to warrant an upgrade of his discharge.

3.  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.

4.  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

___fe___  __rd___  __ra___  DENY APPLICATION

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

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2002066831	
SUFFIX		
RECON		
DATE BOARDED	20020611	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE		
DATE OF DISCHARGE		
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY		
DISCHARGE REASON		
BOARD DECISION	deny	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.		
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.