MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:        

	BOARD DATE:            13 January 2000
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR1999029706

	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. Jessie B. Strickland		Analyst	

The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Mr. Ernest M. Willcher		Chairperson	
	Mr. Ernest W. Lutz, Jr.		Member	
	Ms. Margaret V. Thompson		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 a general discharge.

APPLICANT STATES:  That he had no court-martial convictions and he desires to have his discharge upgraded so that he may receive VA benefits.

EVIDENCE OF RECORD:  The applicant's military records were destroyed in the 1973 fire at the National Personnel Records Center at St. Louis, Missouri which destroyed millions of service records.  However, reconstructed records show:

The applicant enlisted on 2 February 1953 for a period of 3 years and was honorably discharged on 7 August 1953 for the convenience of the government.  He reenlisted the following day for a period of 6 years and was trained as a field communications specialist.

He served in Korea and was awarded the Korean Service Medal and the United Nations Service Medal for his service in Korea.

The facts and circumstances surrounding the applicant’s administrative discharge are not present in the available records.  However, his records do contain a duly constituted report of separation (DD Form 214) which shows that he was discharged under other than honorable conditions on 2 September 1959 under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-208, for unfitness, based on his involvement in frequents incidents of a discreditable nature with civil or military authorities. He had served 6 years, 6 months, and 8 days of total active service and had 24 days of lost time due to AWOL.  He was serving in the pay grade of E-1 at the time of his discharge.
 
There is no evidence in the available records to show that the applicant applied to the Army Discharge Review Board for an upgrade of his discharge within that board’s 15-year statute of limitations.

Army Regulation 635-208, in effect at the time, set forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel by reason of unfitness for those individuals involved in frequent incidents of a discreditable nature with civil or military authorities.  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, it must be presumed that the applicant’s voluntary request for separation under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 10, for the good of the service, to avoid trial by  court-martial, was administratively correct and in conformance with applicable regulations.

2.  Accordingly, it appears that the type of discharge directed and the reasons therefore were appropriate under the circumstances.

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 the aforementioned requirement.

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

__mvt___  ___ewl__  ___ew___  DENY APPLICATION

						Karl F. Schneider
						Director, Army Review Boards Agency

INDEX

CASE ID	AR1999029706	
SUFFIX		
RECON		
DATE BOARDED	2000/01/13	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE	UD	
DATE OF DISCHARGE	1959/09/02	
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY	AR 635-208	
DISCHARGE REASON	583/unfit	
BOARD DECISION	DENY	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.  583 	144.5000/A51.00	
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.