MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:       

	BOARD DATE:            22 March 2000
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR1999030415

	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. James M. Alward		Chairperson	
	Mr. Ted S. Kanamine		Member	
	Mr. Arthur A. Omartian		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:  In effect, that he was stubborn and made a lot of stupid mistakes when he was younger.  He further states that he had served 32 months of his 36 month enlistment and had requested a transfer but that it was denied.  He also states that he was told at the time that if his post-service conduct was good he could get his discharge upgraded.  He continues by stating that he worked for one corporation for 33 years, that he was married for 29 years before his wife passed away, that he has had four uncles who served in World War II, and that not only does he not want to be the only member of his family with a bad discharge, he also doesn’t want his children and grandchildren to know of his discharge after he dies. 

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, records obtained from alternate sources show:

He enlisted in Cleveland, Ohio on 31 March 1956 for a period of 3 years.  He completed his training and was transferred to Germany for duty as a field communications crewman.

During the period from 19 November 1957 to 4 August 1958, nonjudicial punishment was imposed against him on at least four separate occasions for offenses ranging from traffic violations, sleeping on guard duty, missing formations, to insubordination to a commissioned officer.  He was also convicted by a summary court-martial on 24 July 1958 for being AWOL for 1 day which resulted in a forfeiture of pay.

The applicant underwent a psychiatric evaluation on 20 August 1958 in which he informed the examining psychiatrist that he did not like authority and that he always resisted it, even at home.  He also stated that he did not like his unit but that he had not requested a transfer because he knew it wouldn’t do him any good.  The psychiatrist opined that the applicant was mentally responsible to distinguish right from wrong and to adhere to the right and that further rehabilitation did not appear to be warranted.

On 15 September 1958 he was notified by his commander that he was being recommended for separation from the service under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-208 based on undesirable habits or traits of character that rendered him unfit for further military service.  He was directed to report before a board of officers to determine if he should be separated or retained.  The commander cited as the basis for his recommendation, the applicant’s disciplinary record as well as his failure to respond to repeated counseling sessions by the chain of command.

On 17 September 1958 he appeared before a board of officers represented by counsel and challenged one officer on the board.  The officer was removed and the board continued.

Testimony was presented by members of the chain of command to the effect that the applicant was insubordinate, belligerent, loud-mouthed, and that he could not get along with others.  They further opined that he had a bad attitude, that he acted childish and always questioned authority, and that he had not requested a reassignment.  Additionally, that he was not a team player and showed no loyalty to his unit or leaders.  All members testifying stated that they had continually counseled him to no avail and that they did not desire to serve with him again.

The applicant’s counsel, testifying in his behalf, stated that the applicant desired another chance to show that he could control his temper and his tongue and requested that he be transferred to another unit to finish out his enlistment and receive an honorable discharge.

The board of officers, after reviewing the testimony and evidence of record found that the applicant displayed undesirable traits of character and habits manifested by continually committing petty offenses not warranting trial by court-martial and recommended that he be discharged from the service with an undesirable discharge.

The appropriate authority approved the findings and recommendation of the board and the applicant was discharged under other than honorable condition on 1 November 1958, under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-208 due to habits and traits of character that rendered him unfit for further service.  He had served 2 years, 7 months, and 1 days of total active service.

There is no indication in the available records to show that the applicant ever 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 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.

2.  The applicant’s administrative separation was accomplished in compliance with applicable regulations with no violations or procedural errors which would tend to jeopardize his rights.

3.  Accordingly, the type of discharge directed and the reasons therefor were appropriate considering all of the available facts of the case.

4.  The applicant’s contentions have been noted by the Board.  However, given the repeated nature of his offenses and his otherwise undistinguished record of service, they are not sufficiently mitigating to warrant an upgrade of his discharge. 

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

___ja ___  ___tsk___  __ao____  DENY APPLICATION

						Karl F. Schneider
						Director, Army Review Boards Agency

INDEX

CASE ID	AR1999030415	
SUFFIX		
RECON		
DATE BOARDED	2000/03/22	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE	UD	
DATE OF DISCHARGE	1958/11/01	
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY	AR635-208	
DISCHARGE REASON	592/UNFIT	
BOARD DECISION	DENY	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.  592 	144.5100/A51.00	
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.