MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:   

	BOARD DATE:                              
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AC9811472

	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	
	M		Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Mr. 		Chairperson	
	Mr. 		Member	
	Mr. 		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 discharge be upgraded to a general discharge or a medical discharge.

APPLICANT STATES:  Alcohol and drugs impaired his ability to function as a soldier.  Alcoholism, as well as drug abuse, is a disease.

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

He enlisted in the Regular Army on 31 August 1965.  He completed basic combat training, although his conduct and efficiency ratings were “unsatisfactory” and he accepted non-judicial punishment under Article 15, Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) one time for failing to go to his appointed place of duty.  He completed advanced individual training (with conduct and efficiency ratings of “excellent”) and was awarded military occupational specialty 36K (Field Wireman).  He completed basic airborne training and his first assignment with conduct and efficiency ratings of “excellent.”

On or about 3 November 1965, the applicant wrote a letter to Headquarters, Department of the Army (the initial reply was from The Adjutant General) wherein he requested separation or a transfer so he could be close to his family, who needed his help.  He also stated he was “not fit for the service,” but did not elaborate.

On 11 January 1966, an assistant adjutant from his installation replied to The Adjutant General that the applicant had been personally interviewed on that date.  He stated he was physically sound but that conditions at home were such that he felt a hardship discharge was warranted.  He was advised to obtain the necessary documentation and he would be assisted in submitting such an application.

On 27 July 1966, the applicant accepted non-judicial punishment under Article 15, UCMJ for being absent without authority from his place of duty.

On 2 September 1966, the applicant was convicted by a summary court-martial for disobeying a lawful order to transfer himself and his property to another unit at Fort Bragg, NC.  He was sentenced to be reduced to pay grade E-1, to forfeit $64 pay for 1 month and to hard labor for 30 days.

On 2 November 1966, the applicant was convicted by a special court-martial of being absent without leave (AWOL) from 22 October - 1 November 1966.  He was sentenced to forfeit $64 pay for 3 months, to hard labor for 45 days and to confinement at hard labor for 45 days (suspended for 45 days).

On 27 July 1967, the applicant was convicted by a special court-martial of being AWOL from 30 January - 21 June 1967.  He was sentenced to forfeit $64 pay for 6 months and to confinement at hard labor for 6 months.

The discharge packet is not available.

On 4 August 1967, the applicant completed a separation physical.  The examining physician noted that the “patient takes bennies, pain pills, heavy doses of cough syrup and smoking marijuana.”

On 17 August 1967, the applicant completed a psychiatric evaluation.  He was diagnosed with a character and behavior disorder, inadequate personality, manifested by chronic difficulty in conforming to social standards and habituating use of illicit drugs.  His mental status examination was within acceptable limits.  His was not demented and had the knowledge of right and wrong, but his determinations were tinged and posed from his standpoint of survival.  He was found to not be suffering from a psychiatric disease.  He was aware of right and wrong and had the ability to adhere to the right, however, his conduct was not amenable to his continuing in the military service, nor were there facilities within the military setting for his rehabilitation.  It was recommended he be promptly separated from the service according to the requests and at the directive of his commander.

On 11 October 1967, the applicant was discharged, with a discharge under other than honorable conditions, in pay grade E-1, under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-212.  It is not known if he was discharged for unsuitability or unfitness.  He had completed 1 year, 4 months and 17 days of creditable active service and had 264 days of lost time.

Army Regulation 635-212, in effect at the time, set forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel.  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.  It also provided for a discharge for unsuitability by reason of inaptitude, personality disorder, alcohol abuse or homosexual tendencies..  An undesirable, UOTHC 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.  The applicant indicated family problems in 1965 but there is no evidence he ever submitted an application for a hardship discharge.
2.  The separation physical shows the applicant had problems with drugs of various types; however, the psychiatric examination found he had the ability to know right from wrong and to adhere to the right.  It found no psychiatric disease that would warrant processing through medical channels.  The applicant was cleared for separation.

3.  In the absence of evidence to the contrary, it is presumed that the discharge proceedings under Army Regulation 635-212 were conducted in accordance with law and regulations applicable at the time.  The character of the discharge is commensurate with his overall record.

4.  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

________  ________  ________  DENY APPLICATION

						Loren G. Harrell
						Director