MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:       

	BOARD DATE:            12 April 2000
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR1999030205

	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. Robert G. Hinkle		Chairperson	
	Ms. Barbara J. Ellis		Member	
	Mr. James P. Steuve		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 at least a general discharge.

APPLICANT STATES:  In effect, that he requested emergency leave to go home and be with his mother who was on her death bed and to help his father make a living.  He further states that his father was in poor health and he was the oldest son so after being denied leave by the commander and the chaplain, he went AWOL.  He continues by stating that he is now in poor health and needs some assistance from the Department of Veterans Affairs (formerly known as the VA).

COUNSEL CONTENDS:  That the applicant only had 11 days of lost time and that he has suffered the effects of a less than honorable discharge for over 40 years and that any further punishment would be excessive.

EVIDENCE OF RECORD:  The applicant's military records were destroyed in the 1973 fire at the National Personnel Records Center in St. Louis, Missouri which destroyed millions of service records.  However, his reconstructed records contain a report of separation (WD AGO Form 53-55) which shows:

The applicant enlisted in Oklahoma City, Oklahoma on 23 November 1948 for a period of 2 years.

The facts and circumstances surrounding his administrative discharge are not present in the available records.  However, his WD AGO Form 53-55 shows that he was discharged under other than honorable conditions on 15 November 1949 under the provisions of Army Regulation 615-366 for physical unfitness and AWOL.  He had served 6 months and 21 days of total active service and had 11 days of lost time due to AWOL. 

Army Regulation 615-366 served as the authority for the discharge of enlisted personnel for misconduct.  It provided, in pertinent part, that enlisted personnel who were charged with being AWOL and who were deemed physically unfit for military service would be administratively discharged with an undesirable discharge.

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 administrative separation under the provisions of Army Regulation 615-366 was administratively correct and in conformance with applicable regulations with no violations of the applicant’s rights.

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

3.  The applicant’s contentions have been noted by the Board; however, they are not supported by the evidence submitted with his application or the limited evidence of record.  Accordingly, they are not sufficiently mitigating to warrant relief when compared to his otherwise undistinguished record of service during a relatively short period.

4.  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.

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

___rgh__  ___jps___  ___be___  DENY APPLICATION

						Karl F. Schneider
						Director, Army Review Boards Agency

INDEX

CASE ID	AR1999030205	
SUFFIX		
RECON		
DATE BOARDED	2000/04/12	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE	UD	
DATE OF DISCHARGE	1949/06/24	
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY	AR615-366	
DISCHARGE REASON	626/MISCONDUCT	
BOARD DECISION	DENY	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.  144.6000	626/A60.00	
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.