MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:    

	BOARD DATE:           27 June 2000                   
	DOCKET NUMBER:  AR1999030621

	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. Ron Williams		Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Mr. Mark D. Manning 		Chairperson	
	Mr. Walter T. Morrison 		Member	
	Mr. Curtis L. Greenway 		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: In effect, that his undesirable discharge (UD) be upgraded to honorable.

APPLICANT STATES:  In effect, that he was not mature enough at the time.

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

On 25 May 1966 the applicant enlisted in the Regular Army for 3 years.  At the time of his enlistment he was 18 years old and achieved an Armed Forces Qualifications Test Score (AFQT) of 25 (i.e., mental category IV).  The applicant successfully completed basic combat training at Fort Dix, New Jersey and was assigned to advanced individual training (AIT) at Fort Gordon, Georgia.   

On or about 15 August 1966 the applicant reported to Fort Gordon for AIT.

Between 19 August 1966 and 27 March 1968 the applicant accumulated the following: six periods of AWOL; two periods of civil confinement; five periods of military confinement; three convictions by special court-martial for AWOL; and accrued a total of 562 days of lost time due to AWOL and confinement.

On 9 April 1968, after being advised by counsel of his rights and the basis for the contemplated action to separate him, the applicant waived consideration of his case by a board of officers, declined representation by counsel, and declined the opportunity to submit a statement in his own behalf.

On 10 April 1968 while serving his period of confinement at Fort Knox, Kentucky his commanding officer recommended that the applicant be discharged from the Army under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-212 for unfitness.

On 15 April 1968 the appropriate authority approved the applicant’s discharge with an undesirable discharge.  Accordingly, on 22 April 1968 the applicant was discharged after completing 4 months and 6 days of creditable active military service and accruing 562 days of lost time.

On 16 October 1981 the Army Discharge Review Board (ADRB) denied the applicant’s request for an upgrade of his discharge.

Army Regulation 635-212, in effect at the time, set forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel.  Paragraph 6a(1) of the regulation provided, in pertinent part, that members involved in frequent incidents of a discreditable nature with civil or military authorities were subject to separation for unfitness.  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.  The Board noted the applicant’s contention that, in effect, he was not mature enough at the time.  However, the Board concluded that the applicant’s youth and immaturity did not mitigate his misconduct sufficiently to warrant relief.  Further, the Board found that the discharge proceedings were conducted in accordance with law and regulations applicable at the time; and that the character of the discharge is commensurate with the applicant’s overall record of military service.

2.  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 records is in error or unjust.  The applicant has failed to submit evidence that would satisfy this requirement.

3.  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

__mdm___  ___wtm__  _clg___  DENY APPLICATION

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

INDEX

CASE ID	AR1999030621	
SUFFIX		
RECON		
DATE BOARDED	20000627	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE	UD	
DATE OF DISCHARGE	19680422	
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY	AR 635-212	
DISCHARGE REASON	144.5000.0000	
BOARD DECISION	DENY	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES        1. 	144.9235.0000	
2.	144.9301.0000	
3.	144.0100.0000	
4.		
5.		
6.