MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

		IN THE CASE OF:  

		BOARD DATE:          18 November 2003
		DOCKET NUMBER:  AR2003087830

	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. Paul Wright		Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Mr. John N. Slone		Chairperson	
	Mr. Mark D. Manning		Member	
	Ms. Barbara J. Ellis		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:  Upgrade of his discharge to "honorable under general conditions" (sic).

APPLICANT STATES:  That he unfortunately became ill during his second term of service with alcoholism.  It took control of his life.  He was led to believe that his discharge would automatically be upgraded after 6 months.  Attached to his application is an additional statement, along with a criminal record check from the state of North Carolina and a character reference letter from his church.

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

That he had a prior period of active duty from 20 February 1958 through 19 February 1961 for which he received an honorable discharge by reason of expiration of term of service (ETS).

He immediately reenlisted on 20 February 1961 for a period of 6 years.

On 4 October 1962, the applicant was given a letter of reprimand for being involved in a privately-owned vehicle (POV) accident while being absent without leave (AWOL) on 11 September 1962.

On 2 February 1963, the applicant accepted non-judicial punishment (NJP) under the provisions of Article 15, Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ), for failing to be in his quarters and being absent from bed check on 28 January 1963, and for being absent without authority on 29 January 1963.  Punishment included a reprimand and reduction to pay grade E-2.

On 20 June 1963, the applicant accepted NJP for being apprehended by the Military Police for being AWOL and for illegal possession of a Class A Pass on 16 June 1963.  Punishment included forfeiture of $15.00.

On 28 June 1963, the applicant accepted NJP for being apprehended by the Military Police for having an illegal Class A Pass.  Punishment included forfeiture of $15.00 and 2 hours of extra duty for a period of 14 days.

On 14 August 1963, a bar to reenlistment was approved.

On 13 November 1963, the applicant accepted NJP for being absent from his unit on 8 November 1963.  Punishment included restriction for 14 days.

On 5 December 1963, the applicant accepted NJP for being absent from his unit on 1 November 1963, failing to go to duty on 18, 19, and 21 November 1963.  Punishment included forfeiture of $60.00 per month for 2 months.

On 11 February 1964, the applicant accepted NJP for missing bed check.  Punishment included restriction for 7 days.

On 10 March 1964, the applicant accepted NJP for being AWOL 5-7 March 1964. Punishment included reduction to pay grade E-2.

On 10 June 1964, the applicant was convicted by a special court-martial of failing to go to duty on 1 May 1964, of being absent from his unit on 1-2 May 1964, of wrongfully appropriating a POV of another enlisted soldier on 1 May 1964, of operating a POV without a license on 1 May 1964, and of disobeying a lawful order of a non-commissioned officer on 2 May 1964.  He was sentenced to confinement at hard labor for 3 months (suspended for 6 months), forfeiture of $73.00 pay per month for 3 months, and reduction to pay grade E-1.

On 29 December 1964, the applicant accepted NJP for failure to repair, missing bed check, and for failing to report for guard duty on 27 December 1964.  Punishment included forfeiture of $10.00 and 14 days of extra duty.

On 20 January 1965, the applicant accepted NJP for failing to repair to his place of duty on 19 January 1965.  Punishment included restriction for 7 days and extra duty for 7 days.

On 11 May 1965, the applicant was convicted by a summary court-martial of 2 specifications of disobeying a lawful order of an officer on 1 May and 2 May 1965, and of breaking restriction on 30 April 1965.  The sentence was confinement at hard labor for 30 days, forfeiture of $75.00, and reduction to pay grade E-1.  The convening authority modified the sentence to change the forfeiture to $50.00, and suspended the confinement for 30 days.

On 2 August 1965, the applicant was convicted by a summary court-martial of failing to go to duty on 23 July 1965.  The sentence was reduction to pay grade E-1, hard labor without confinement for 25 days, and restriction for 25 days.

On 7 September 1965, the applicant was convicted by a special court-martial of breaking restriction on 13 August 1965, 3 specifications of failing to go to duty on 13, 19, and 24 August 1965, of leaving his place of duty on 24 August 1965, and 2 specifications of being disrespectful to an officer on 19 August and 1 September 1965.  The sentence was confinement at hard labor for 6 months, and forfeiture of $75.00 pay per month for 6 months.

On 10 January 1966, the applicant received a psychiatric evaluation.  He was diagnosed with passive aggressive reaction.  Separation from the Army was recommended.

On 3 February 1966, the applicant acknowledged that he was being recommended for separation with an Undesirable Discharge.  He accepted representation by counsel, requested that his case be heard by a board of officers, and indicated that he was submitting a statement in his behalf.

On 5 February 1996, the applicant's commander recommended to higher headquarters that he appear before a board of officers for consideration for elimination from the service under the provisions of Army Regulation (AR) 635-208.  He further recommended separation with an Undesirable Discharge.

On 26 February 1966, the applicant accepted NJP for being absent from duty on 27 February 1966, and for being absent from his unit from 23-24 February 1966. Punishment included extra duty for 14 days and restriction for 14 days.

On 28 March 1966, the applicant submitted another acknowledgement of his proposed separation.  He again requested a board of officers and indicated he was submitting a statement in his behalf.  He declined representation by counsel. The record contains no evidence that a board of officers was held.

On 1 April 1966, the applicant accepted NJP for being absent from his unit on 23 March 1966.  Punishment included forfeiture of $62.00 for 1 month and extra duty for 30 days.  The applicant appealed the forfeiture.  His appeal was denied on 6 April 1966.

On 4 April 1966, the applicant received a separation physical and was found qualified for separation.  There is a notation of a history of excessive drinking for 2 years on the Standard Form 89 (Report of Medical History).

The approval action by the general court-martial convening authority is missing from the file.

On 8 April 1966, the applicant was separated with an undesirable discharge (UD) under the provisions of AR 635-208 by reason of unfitness.  His DD Form 214 (Armed Forces of the United States Report of Transfer or Discharge) shows he had 4 years, 6 months, and 6 days of active Federal service.  He had 223 days of lost time and 3 days of excess leave. 

AR 635-208, then in effect, set forth the policy for administrative separation for unfitness (misconduct).  Paragraph 1c(1) of the regulation provided, in pertinent part, for the separation of personnel where there was evidence of an antisocial or amoral trend, chronic alcoholism, criminalism, drug addiction, pathological lying, or misconduct.  Action to separate an individual was to be taken when, in the judgment 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, a UD was normally issued.

There is no evidence that the applicant applied to the Army Discharge Review Board for upgrade of his discharge within its 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.  Although the applicant asserts he was an alcoholic and blames his misconduct on alcoholism, his record does not generally support this claim.  Furthermore, the applicant has not submitted any evidence to verify any such diagnosis or record of treatment for alcoholism.

2.  The reason for discharge and the characterization of service were both proper and equitable.  Further, the quality of the applicant's service did not meet the standards of acceptable conduct and performance expected of Army personnel; therefore, he is not entitled to an upgrade of his undesirable discharge to an honorable discharge.

3.  The US 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 submits a DD Form 149 requesting 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.  

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

__jns___  __mdm___  __bje___  DENY APPLICATION

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

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2003087830	
SUFFIX		
RECON		
DATE BOARDED	20031118	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE	UD	
DATE OF DISCHARGE	19660408	
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY	AR 635-208.  .  .  .  .  	
DISCHARGE REASON	A51.00	
BOARD DECISION	(DENY)	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.	144.5000	
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.