MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:     

	BOARD DATE:            8 August 2000  
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR1999031636

	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	
	Ms. Antoinette Farley		Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Mr. Stanley Kelley		Chairperson	
	Mr. James E. Anderholm		Member	
	Ronald E. Blakely		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 (UD) be upgraded to a general discharge or an honorable discharge.

APPLICANT STATES:  That his girlfriend accompanied him and his buddy to join the Army at the Detroit, Michigan, recruiting station under the buddy system.  His buddy changed his mind and backed out of their agreement.  He joined the Army anyway, while his girlfriend and buddy returned home.  He completed his basic training at Fort Leonard Wood, Missouri, and feels that he did well during training.  He was then transferred to Fort Eustis, Virginia, for advanced individual training.  It was at this point that he and his girlfriend began having personal relationship problems, which he feels were caused by her seeing other people.  He states he received a weekend pass and traveled home only to discover she was seeing other people, thereby breaking his heart.  Over the next couple of months they worked on the relationship, married in January 1957, and had a child.  Even after getting married his personal problems seemed to consume their relationship.  He felt that this caused him to go absent without leave (AWOL) in order to check on his wife’s behavior.  He felt that at the time his marriage and child were more important than the Army.  He was transferred to Germany in October 1957.  While securing a place to stay for the family, she became involved with another person and became pregnant.  He states during this time he lost all respect for the Army and therefore was “put in the stockade due to his attitude”.  He claims, that the Army did not help him with his problems.  After discharge, he was able to maintain his marriage with their two children and her child for 28 years, before divorcing.  He points out that he worked for the same company for 23 and1/2 years, until forced to retire due to the consolidation of his company’s work force .  He feels that his ability to serve was impaired not only by his youth and immaturity but also by his spouse’s poor behavior, and therefore impaired his judgement.  

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

He enlisted in the Regular Army for a period of 3 years on 18 April 1956.  He completed his basic training at Fort Leonard Wood.  On 18 July 1956, he was assigned to Fort Eustis, for advanced individual training in military occupational specialty (MOS) 681.10 (Aircraft Engineering Repairman). 

On 19 October 1956, he was convicted by a special court-martial (SPCM) of being AWOL from 2 to 9 October 1956.  His sentence included forfeiture of $25.00 pay per month for 2 months and restriction for 2 months. 

He was AWOL from 4 to 5 February 1957, but there is no punishment of record.

On 11 June 1957, he was convicted by a SPCM of being AWOL from 
27 February to 17 May 1957.  His sentence included forfeiture of $28.00 pay per month for 5 months and confinement at hard labor for 5 months.  On 30 August 1957, the SPCM convening authority directed that his confinement be suspended for a period of 3 months, unless sooner vacated. 

On 29 September 1957, the applicant was transferred to Germany for duty in his MOS.

On 20 February 1958, he was convicted by the first summary court martial (SCM) for being derelict in the performance of his duty on 14 February 1958.  He was sentenced to forfeiture of $25.00, reduction to pay grade E-1 and restriction for 
30 days.  

In addition, his DD Form 789 (Unit Punishment Record), shows that he received two company punishments for missing bed check on 28 May and 31 May 1958.

On 4 June 1958, the applicant was informed by his unit commander, that he was initiating discharge action for under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-208, for unfitness.

On 10 June 1958, he received his second SCM for missing bed check on 1 June 1958.  He was sentenced to 30 days restriction to his company area.  On 
19 June 1958, he received his third SCM for breaking restriction on 18 June 1958.  He was sentenced to confinement at hard labor for 30 days.  

On 24 June 1958, the applicant’s unit commander recommended that he be required to appear before a board of officers, for determination of inaptitude and/or unsuitability for further military service

On 27 June 1958, authorization was granted to convene a board of officers to determine if the applicant should be separated under the provisions of 
AR 635-208 for unfitness.

On 1 July 1958, the applicant acknowledged notification to appear before a board of officers. 

On 3 July 1958, the board of officers met and the applicant appeared without counsel.  The board recommended that he be separated from the service because of unfitness and that he be furnished a UD.  

On 7 July 1958, the applicant underwent a medical examination which determined he was fit to be separated.  

On 16 July 1958, the separation authority approved his separation with a UD and directed that he be returned to Fort Dix, New Jersey for separation. 

On 9 August 1958, the applicant was separated under the provisions of Army Regulation 625-208, for unfitness, by reason of undesirable habits or traits of character manifested by misconduct, with a UD.  He had completed a total of 
1 year and 8 months and 18 days of active military service and he had 217 days lost time due to being AWOL or in confinement.  

The applicant sought a discharge upgrade from the Army Discharge Review Board (ADRB).  After a thorough review of his file, the ADRB denied his request on 
19 January 1972.

Army Regulation 635-208, in effect at the time set forth procedures and authority for separation of enlisted personnel for unfitness.  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.  A UD 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 these requirements.

2.  Notwithstanding his completion of training and reaching pay grade E-2, his record of misconduct clearly showed that he was unwilling or unable to further perform his duties as a soldier consistent with the Army standards for acceptable personal conduct and performance by military personnel.

3.  The applicant’s administrative separation was accomplished in compliance with applicable regulations with no indication of procedural errors, which would tend to jeopardize his rights.  

4.  The Board accepts the applicant’s contention that he was young at the time of enlistment, with an apparent lack of maturity and overwhelming personal problems.  Further, his good post service conduct and actions are commendable.  However, neither of these factors overcome the serious nature of the offenses and his demonstrated disregard for military authority and therefore are not sufficiently mitigating to warrant relief. 

5.  The type of discharge directed and the reason therefore were appropriate considering all the facts of the case.

6.  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

__sk____  __jea___  __reb ____  DENY APPLICATION

    Carl W.S. Chun
    Director, Army Board for Correction
    Director

INDEX

CASE ID	AR1999031636	
SUFFIX		
RECON		
DATE BOARDED	20000802	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE	UD	
DATE OF DISCHARGE	19580809	
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY	AR 635-208	
DISCHARGE REASON	A50.00	
BOARD DECISION	DENY	
REVIEW AUTHORITY	Director	
ISSUES         1.	A10.00	
2.	A73.01	
3.	A73.02	
4.		
5.		
6.		

He submits a detailed explanation for his actions and his employment history.