MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:      

	BOARD DATE:            21 March 2002                  
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR2001065125

	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. Stephanie Thompkins		Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Mr. John N. Slone		Chairperson	
	Ms. Linda D. Simmons		Member	
	Mr. John T. Meixell		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, a change of the reason for his discharge.

APPLICANT STATES:  That he did resist the discharge even if it was honorable and he did not deserve a Section VIII discharge.  He also states he did not receive a Good Conduct Medal.  He submits a detailed letter, three letters of support and a copy of his discharge certificate in support of his application and to show he was intelligent and a good citizen.

EVIDENCE OF RECORD:  The applicant's military records were lost or destroyed in the National Personnel Records Center fire of 1973.  Information herein was obtained from reconstructed personnel records.  These records show:

Department of Army, the Office of The Surgeon General hospital admission cards show he was diagnosed in April 1944 with Psychosis, manic-depressive after completion of 1 month of service.

The facts and circumstances pertaining to the applicant's discharge are not available.  War Department Form No. 366-b, indicates that the applicant was honorably discharged on 25 April 1944 per Section VIII, Army Regulation 615-360, for Lack of adaptability for military service.

There is no evidence to show he was awarded or was entitled to a Good Conduct Medal.

Army Regulation 615-360, in effect at the time, set forth the policy and procedures for separation of enlisted personnel.  Section VIII provided for cases of inaptness (lack of a required degree of adaptability) and for those who demonstrated undesirable habits and traits of character.  Section VIII also specifies that under the basic War Department policy, no man would be separated prior to the expiration of his term of service unless no useful service could be obtained from him.  Normally a blue discharge certificate stating only the pertinent regulation, but neither a reason for separation nor a characterization of service, was used to identify this other than honorable discharge.  An honorable discharge was issued to those individuals who tried faithfully to serve, but could not. 

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 view of the circumstances in this case, the applicant is not entitled to a change of the reason for his discharge, or to deletion of Section VIII from his discharge records.  He has not shown error, injustice, or inequity for the relief he now requests.

2.  While the Board is empathetic, there is no evidence of record to substantiate the applicant's claim that he did not deserve this type of discharge.  There is also no evidence to show entitlement to a Good Conduct Medal.

3.  In the absence of evidence to the contrary, it is presumed that the discharge proceedings were conducted in accordance with law and regulations applicable at the time.  The applicant has not shown otherwise.

4.  The Board notes in this case that the applicant’s service of 1 month was honorable, and that he tried faithfully to serve but could not do so through no voluntary fault of his own.

5.  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 this requirement.

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

_jns____  _lds_____  _jtm____    DENY APPLICATION

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

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2001065125	
SUFFIX		
RECON		
DATE BOARDED	20020321	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE		
DATE OF DISCHARGE		
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY		
DISCHARGE REASON		
BOARD DECISION	DENY	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.	111.00	
2.	110.02	
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.