PROCEEDINGS

	IN THE CASE OF: 

            BOARD DATE:           16 December 1999
	DOCKET NUMBER:    AR1999029615

	I certify that hereinafter is recorded the true and complete record of the proceedings of the Army Board for Correction of Military Records in the case of the above-named individual.  

	Mr. Loren G. Harrell		Director	
	Ms. Joyce A. Wright		Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Mr. Fred K. McCoy		Chairperson	
	Mr. Raymond V. O’Connor, Jr.		Member	
	Mr. Stanley Kelley		Member	

	The applicant and counsel if any, did not appear before the Board.

	The Board considered the following evidence:

	Exhibit A - Application for correction of military 
                records
	Exhibit B - Military Personnel Records (including
	            advisory opinion, if any)

FINDINGS:

1.  The applicant has exhausted or the Board has waived the requirement for exhaustion of all administrative remedies afforded by existing law or regulations.

2.  The applicant requests, in effect, that his undesirable discharge be upgraded to an honorable discharge.

3.  The applicant states, in effect, that item 19c (DATE OF ENTRY) of his DD Form 214 (with an effective date of 3 June 60) is incorrect.  He also states that he got into trouble while home on leave and was unable to appear before a military board.  He further states that he received his DD Form 214 (with an effective date of 3 June 1960) while he was in civil confinement for something he did not do.

4.  He was inducted on 21 October 1959.

5.  On 1 January 1960, the applicant was arrested by civil authorities in Kissimmee, Florida.  He was placed in civilian confinement for armed robbery and was released on 22 January 1960 pending trial.  He continued to serve until he was honorably discharged on 10 April 1960 in order to reenlist.

6.  The applicant’s personnel records contain a DD Form 4 (Enlistment Record – Armed Forces of the United States) which shows that he reenlisted on 11 April 1960.  He was arraigned, tried by jury and found guilty for armed robbery on 29 April 1960.  He was sentenced to 6 months to life imprisonment at the Kissimme County Jail in Kissimme, Florida.

7.  The facts and circumstances pertaining to the applicant’s discharge are not present in the available records.  However, his DD Form 214 shows that on 3 June 1960, he was discharged under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-206, due to his civil court conviction.  He served 5 months and 21 days of creditable service and had 54 days of lost time due to confinement.

8.  There is no evidence that the applicant applied to the Army Discharge Review
Board (ADRB) for an upgrade of his discharge within its 15-year statute of
limitations.

9.  Army Regulation 635-206, in effect at that time, set forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel.  Paragraph 37 of the regulation provided, in pertinent part, the convening authority is authorized to order discharge or direct retention in the military service when disposition of an individual has been made by a domestic court of the US or its territorial possessions.  An undesirable discharge was normally considered appropriate.  

10.  Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel.  Chapter 14 establishes policy and prescribes procedures for separating members for misconduct.  Specific categories include minor 
disciplinary infractions, a pattern of misconduct, commission of a serious offense, convictions by civil authorities, desertion or absence without leave.  Action will be taken to separate a member for misconduct when it is clearly established that rehabilitation is impracticable or is unlikely to succeed.

CONCLUSIONS:

1.  In the absence of evidence to the contrary, it must be presumed that the applicant’s administrative separation was accomplished in compliance with applicable regulations with no procedural errors, which would tend to jeopardize his rights.

2.  The type of separation directed and the reasons therefor were appropriate considering all of the facts of the case.

3.  The applicant’s personnel records show that he reenlisted on 11 April 1960.  Therefore, item 19c (DATE OF ENTRY) of his DD Form 214 (with an effective date of 3 June 1960) should be corrected to show the entry “11 Apr 60” instead of the entry “21 Oct 59”.

4.  In view of the foregoing findings and conclusions, it would be appropriate to correct the applicant’s records, but only as recommended below.

RECOMMENDATION:

1.  That all of the Department of the Army records related to this case be corrected by showing in item 19c (DATE OF ENTRY) the entry “11 Apr 60”
vice the entry “21 Oct 59” of his DD Form 214 (with an effective date of 3 June 1960).

2.  That so much of the application as is in excess of the foregoing be denied.

BOARD VOTE:  

FKM_____  RVO____  SK_____  GRANT AS STATED IN RECOMMENDATION

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

________  ________  ________  DENY APPLICATION

		Fred K. McCoy_________
		        CHAIRPERSON

INDEX

CASE ID	AR1999029615	
SUFFIX		
RECON	YYYYMMDD	
DATE BOARDED	19991216	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE	UOTHC	
DATE OF DISCHARGE	19600603	
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY	AR 635-206	
DISCHARGE REASON		
BOARD DECISION	GRANT	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.  191		
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.