MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:      

	BOARD DATE:           09 APRIL 2002
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR2002066954

	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. Deborah L. Brantley		Senior Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Mr. Raymond V. O’Connor, Jr.		Chairperson	
	Mr. Raymond J. Wagner		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:  That his undesirable discharge be upgraded. 

APPLICANT STATES:  In effect, that he was young and naïve and did not use good judgement in his decisions and actions.  He states that he has been a model citizen without any "derogatory record."  In support of his request he submits a document confirming his church membership and which indicates that he and his spouse are "supportive and active" in the church.

EVIDENCE OF RECORD:  The applicant's military records were likely lost or destroyed during the 1973 fire at the National Personnel Records Center.  Information contained herein was reconstructed from alternative sources, including information provided by the applicant.

The applicant enlisted and entered active duty on 20 March 1946.  He was 17 years old at the time of his enlistment but turned 18 years old in September 1946.  The applicant served overseas between July 1946 and May 1949.

On 14 June 1949 the applicant was discharged under the provisions of Army Regulation 615-368.  He was issued an Undesirable Discharge Certificate.  His separation document indicates he had 13 days of lost time.  Other than the applicant's separation document, the only records available to the Board were his service medical records.

His separation physical examination, conducted on 13 June 1949, contains a statement that the applicant's was cleared for separation, that "Board proceedings reviewed," and that the applicant was discharged for "undesirable traits."

Army Regulation 615-368, then in effect, set forth the policy and procedures for separation of enlisted personnel for unfitness.  Unfitness included, in addition to misconduct and repeated petty offenses, habits and traits of character manifested by antisocial or amoral trends, habitual shirking, and repeated venereal infections.  Action to separate an individual was to be taken when, in the judgment of the commander, rehabilitation was unsuccessful, impractical or was unlikely to produce a satisfactory soldier.  When separation for unfitness was warranted an undesirable discharge 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 the absence of evidence to the contrary, the Board presumes that the applicant's administrative separation was accomplished in accordance with policies and procedures in effect at the time.  

2.  While the Board has taken cognizance of the applicant’s post service conduct and church membership, none of these factors, either individually or in sum, warrants the relief requested.

3.  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 that requirement.

4.  The actions by the Army in this case were proper, and there is no doubt to be resolved in favor of the applicant.

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

__RVO__  __RJW __  ___DPH_  DENY APPLICATION

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

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2002066954	
SUFFIX		
RECON	YYYYMMDD	
DATE BOARDED	20020409	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE	(HD, GD, UOTHC, UD, BCD, DD, UNCHAR)	
DATE OF DISCHARGE	YYYYMMDD	
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY	AR .  .  .  .  .  	
DISCHARGE REASON		
BOARD DECISION	DENY	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.	110.00	
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.