MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:        

	BOARD DATE:            1 July 1999
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR1999015402

	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. Loren G. Harrell		Director	
	Mr. Jessie B. Strickland		Analyst	

The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Ms. JoAnn H. Langston		Chairperson	
	Mr. Fred K. McCoy		Member	
	Mr. Stanley Kelley		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 the undesirable discharge of her deceased husband, a former service member (FSM), be upgraded to a general discharge. 

APPLICANT STATES:  In effect, that the FSM went AWOL because his son had been taken away from him and he was pursuing him.

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

The FSM enlisted in Louisville, Kentucky on 22 June 1960 for a period of 3 years. He was single at the time of his enlistment and listed no dependents.  He successfully completed his training and was transferred to Germany for duty as an infantryman. 

During the period from 18 June 1961 to 28 July 1962, nonjudicial punishment (NJP) was imposed against the FSM on at least five separate occasions for offenses ranging from curfew violations, AWOL, reporting late for duty under the influence of alcohol, failure to repair, and disobeying a lawful order from an NCO.

On 21 March 1962 he was convicted by a summary court-martial for failure to go to his place of duty.  He was sentenced to be reduced to the pay grade of E-1, a forfeiture of pay, and hard labor for 20 days.

On 12 October 1962 he was convicted by a special court-martial of being AWOL on 29 August 1962, of wrongfully appropriating military property (took a vehicle out of the motor pool without a valid driver’s license and wrecked it while under the influence of alcohol), being disrespectful in language towards a senior NCO, and disobeying a lawful command from a superior officer.  He was sentenced to be reduced to the pay grade of E-1, to be confined at hard labor for 6 months, and a forfeiture of pay. 

The FSM’s commander initiated action on 29 October 1962 to bar the FSM from reenlistment.  The commander cited the FSM’s disciplinary record, his failure to respond to repeated counseling sessions, and habitual misconduct as the basis for his recommendation.  The FSM elected not to submit a statement in his own behalf and the appropriate authority approved the bar to reenlistment.

The FSM underwent a psychiatric evaluation on 7 January 1963 which indicates that the FSM’s adjustment to the Army as a single 19 year had been spotty and fraught with delinquencies.  The examining psychiatrist opined that it was a well planned effort to gain egress from the Army because he (the FSM) stated that he didn’t like it, the cadre, bedcheck, and being treated like a kid.  The FSM stated that he simply wanted out of the service.  The examining psychiatrist opined that further rehabilitative efforts would in all likelihood not be effective and recommended that the applicant be separated from the service.

On 19 January 1963 the FSM’s commander initiated a recommendation to separate the FSM from the service under the provisions of Army Regulation   635-208 for unfitness based on frequent incidents of a discreditable nature with military authorities.  He cited the FSM’s disciplinary record, his failure to respond to counseling after being rehabilitatively transferred to another unit, and breaking arrest as the basis for his recommendation.  

The appropriate authority (a major general) approved the recommendation for separation on 2 February 1963 and directed that the FSM be furnished with an Undesirable Discharge Certificate.

Accordingly, the FSM was returned from Germany to Fort Hamilton, New York and was discharged under other than honorable conditions on 21 February 1963, under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-208 for unfitness due to frequent incidents of a discreditable nature with military authorities.  He was still single and had served 2 years, 6 months and 5 days of total active service.  He had 56 days of lost time due to AWOL and confinement and his records at the time of discharge did not indicate any dependents.

There is no indication in the available records to show that the FSM 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 FSM’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, they are not supported by the evidence submitted with the application or the evidence of record.  Given the seriousness of the FSM’s offenses and his otherwise undistinguished record of service, the applicant’s contentions are not sufficiently mitigating to warrant an upgrade of the FSM’s 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

___jhl ___  __fkm___  ___sk___  DENY APPLICATION

						Loren G. Harrell
						Director

INDEX

CASE ID	AR1999015402	
SUFFIX		
RECON		
DATE BOARDED	1999/07/01	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE	UD	
DATE OF DISCHARGE	1963/02/21	
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY	AR 635-208	
DISCHARGE REASON	Freq incidents of a discred nature	
BOARD DECISION	DENY	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.  656 	144.6400/A64.00 FI	
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.