MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:       

	BOARD DATE:             13 April 2000
	DOCKET NUMBER:    AR1999033070

	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.

	Ms. Joyce A. Wright		Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Mr. Fred Eichorn		Chairperson	
	Ms. Celia L. Adolphi		Member	
	Ms. Sherri V. Ward		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 be upgraded to honorable.

APPLICANT STATES:  In effect, that his discharge was too harsh considering the nature of the offense.  In support of his application he submits a copy of his high school diploma, copy of his general equivalency diploma (GED), certificate of ordination as a deacon, certificate of license from the Gospel Ministry and a letter from his spouse (undated).

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

He entered active duty on 17 January 1964.

Charges were preferred against the applicant on 10 March 1965 for being AWOL form 1 September 1964 to 28 September 1964, 1 October 1964 to 15 October 1964, 17 October 1964 to 27 October 1964, 4 December 1964 to 8 December 1964 and for escaping from confinement from the Post Stockade at Fort Benning, Georgia, on 4 December 1964.  

On 5 December 1964, the applicant was apprehended by civilian authorities 
in Waycross, Georgia, and was returned to military control on 7 December 1964.
He was later taken to Jacksonville Naval Air Station and confined.  On 9 December 1964 he was transported to Fort Stewart, Georgia, and detained and on 10 December 1964 he was transported to Fort Gordon, Georgia, for further disposition.

He was convicted by a special court-martial on 18 February 1965 for the aforementioned offenses.  His sentence consisted of confinement at hard labor for 6 months and a forfeiture of pay.  The sentence was adjudged on 18 February 1965 and approved on 23 February 1965.

On 1 March 1965, the applicant underwent a psychiatric examination, which diagnosed the applicant as having a (3203) inadequate personality, chronic, 
severe; manifested by inability to adjust to military environment, immaturity, labile control of emotional responses to minor environmental stresses, repeated infractions of military rules and regulations with apparent failure to profit from military discipline in spite of prolonged and intensive command counseling, cadre supervision, extra training and punishment, impulsive, immature, escape-type behavior to avoid military duties (AWOLs), “nervousness,” related in a tense,
agitated manner with curt, terse speech and marginal military courtesy and deportment during interview situation, no motivation to serve his country, and impaired insight and judgement.  The psychiatrist determined that he could 

distinguish between right and wrong, possessed the mental capacity to participate in administrative or judicial proceedings and that the applicant had no disqualifying mental defect sufficient to warrant disposition through medical channels.

On 15 March 1965, the applicant’s commander submitted a recommendation to separate the applicant from the service under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-208, for unfitness.  He cited, as the basis for his recommendation, the applicant’s frequent incidents of a discreditable nature with military authorities.

After consulting with counsel, the applicant waived his rights to a personal appearance before a board of officers.  He also waived representation by counsel and opted not to submit a statement in his own behalf.  He acknowledged that he might encounter substantial prejudice in civilian life and might be ineligible for many or all benefits administered by the Veterans
Administration if a discharge under other than honorable conditions were issued.

On 29 March 1965, the appropriate authority approved the recommendation for discharge and directed that he be furnished an Undesirable Discharge Certificate.  The applicant was discharged on 8 April 1965.  He had a total of
7 months and 20 days of creditable service and had 214 days of lost time due to AWOL and confinement.

The applicant underwent a separation medical examination on 6 April 1965 and was found qualified for separation.

There is no evidence that the applicant applied to the Army Discharge Review Board for an upgrade of his discharge within its 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 having undesirable habits and traits of character. Paragraph 2 of the regulation provided, in pertinent part, for the separation of personnel where there was evidence of an antisocial or amoral
trend, chronic alcoholism, drug addiction, pathological lying, or misconduct.  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.  Trial by court-martial was warranted by the gravity of the offenses with which the applicant was charged.  Conviction was effected in accordance with applicable law and regulations.

2.  The applicant was advised of the effects of a discharge under other than honorable conditions and that he might be deprived of many or all Army and 
VA benefits.

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

4.  The type of separation directed and the reasons therefore appear to be appropriate considering all of the available facts of the case.

5.  The Board noted the applicant’s past service achievements; however, there is no evidence in the personnel records, and the applicant has provided no evidence, to show that his discharge was unjust and should be upgraded.
While the Board recognizes the applicant’s academic achievement and his ordination, these are not reasons to upgrade his discharge.

6.  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.

7.  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:

FE_____  CLA____   SVW____  GRANT

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

________  ________  ________  DENY APPLICATION

Karl F. Schneider
Director, Army Review Boards Agency

INDEX

CASE ID	AR1999033070	
SUFFIX		
RECON	YYYYMMDD	
DATE BOARDED	20000413	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE	UD	
DATE OF DISCHARGE	19650408	
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY	AR 635-208  .  .  .  .  	
DISCHARGE REASON		
BOARD DECISION	DENY	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.  189		
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.