MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:   

	BOARD DATE:            2 December 1998                  
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AC98-11386

	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	
	Mrs. Nancy Amos		Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Mr. Raymond V. O’Connor, Jr		Chairperson	
	Mr. George D. Paxson		Member	
	Mr. John H. Kern		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 discharge under other than honorable conditions (UOTHC) be upgraded to an general discharge under honorable conditions.

APPLICANT STATES:  That the reason for his discharge was caused by his post traumatic stress disorder brought on by his duty in Vietnam.

COUNSEL CONTENDS:  In effect, that the applicant’s claims are valid and serve to mitigate his misconduct of record.

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

On 29 May 1969, the applicant enlisted in the Regular Army.  He was honorably discharged on 27 February 1970 and immediately reenlisted on 28 February 1970.

On 30 March 1970, the applicant accepted non-judicial punishment (NJP) under Article 15, Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) for absenting himself from his appointed place of duty.

On 8 April 1970, the applicant accepted NJP under Article 15, UCMJ for failing to go to his appointed place of duty.

On 22 May 1970, the applicant arrived in Vietnam where he served as a scout driver.

On 28 November 1970, the applicant requested a 30-day compassionate leave in order to resolve marital difficulties.  The request apparently was approved.

On 29 December 1970, the applicant’s duty status was changed from ordinary leave to absent without leave (AWOL).  He turned himself in to his unit on         21 January 1971.

The court-martial charge sheet and the Chapter 10 separation packet are not available.

On 24 July 1971, the applicant was discharged, with a discharge UOTHC, in pay grade E-1 under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, Chapter 10, discharge for the good of the service in lieu of trial by court-martial.  He had completed 1 year, 4 months and 27 days of creditable active service and had    23 days of lost time. 

Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel.  Chapter 10 of that regulation provides, in pertinent part, that a member who has committed an offense or offenses for which the authorized punishment includes a punitive discharge may, at any time after the charges have been preferred, submit a request for discharge for the good of the service in lieu of trial by court-martial.  A discharge under other than honorable conditions is 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 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 character of the discharge is commensurate with his overall record.

2.  Since the Chapter 10 packet is missing and there is a six-month gap between the time the applicant returned from AWOL to the time he was discharged, it cannot be determined exactly what triggered his discharge action.  However, the applicant provides no evidence that his PTSD caused the reason for his discharge.

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

RVO_____  GDP_____  JHK_____  DENY APPLICATION

						Loren G. Harrell
						Director

INDEX

CASE ID	AC98-11386	
SUFFIX		
RECON		
DATE BOARDED	19981202	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE	UOTHC	
DATE OF DISCHARGE	710724	
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY	AR 635-200, chapter 10	
DISCHARGE REASON	A70.00	
BOARD DECISION	(DENY)	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.	110.00	
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.