MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:  

	BOARD DATE:  16 December 1999
	DOCKET NUMBER: AC98-10058

	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	
	Ms. Rosa M. Chandler		Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Mr. Fred K. McCoy		Chairperson	
	Mr. Raymond V. O’Connor		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 

APPLICANT REQUESTS:  In effect, that his undesirable discharge (UD) be upgraded to a general discharge (GD).

APPLICANT STATES:  In effect that he was under the influence of drugs and alcohol at the time of his separation.  Additionally, he states that the political mood and public opinion swayed him during the Vietnam era.  In support of his request he submits a character reference.

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

That on 4 September 1969, he was inducted into the Armed Forces of the United States for 2 years and training in military occupational specialty (MOS)
91A (Ambulance Driver). 

On 2 February 1970, the applicant enrolled in the orthopedic cast specialist course at Walter Reed Army Medical Center, Washington, DC.  On 31 March 1970, he went absent without leave (AWOL).  On 3 May 1970, he was returned to military control at Fort Ord, California and placed in the Special Processing Detachment. 

On 14 May 1970, he was found guilty by a summary court-martial of the 
31 March-3 May 1970 AWOL offense.  He was sentenced to forfeiture of pay and restriction.

On 23 June 1970, he was reassigned to Fort Lewis, Washington.  He failed to report to Fort Lewis and on 3 July 1970, he was placed in an AWOL status.  He remained AWOL until he was returned to military control and placed in the Personnel Control Facility (PCF) at Fort Dix, New Jersey on 25 February 1971.

On 22 March 1971, the applicant underwent a psychiatric evaluation by professionally trained personnel.  The evaluation showed that the applicant had a history of drug abuse as far back as 1967.  He had indulged in using marijuana, hashish, speed, LSD, cocaine, peyote, and mescaline.  He had spent 4 months of his previous period of AWOL in a civilian jail for possession of drugs.  

Further, the evaluation showed that the applicant was diagnosed to suffer from a passive-aggressive personality that was chronic to moderate; manifested by drug abuse, negativism, repeated AWOL, stubbornness, and obstructionism.  His condition was determined to have existed prior to service.  He was also determined to be mentally responsible and able to distinguish right from wrong and to adhere to the right.

The recommendation was that he be separated from the service under the appropriate administrative regulation.

On 2 April 1971, the commander notified the applicant that he was being recommended for discharge under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-212, for unfitness with a UD.  On 2 April 1971, he acknowledged receipt.

On 5 April 1971, the applicant consulted with legal counsel.  He was advised of the basis for the contemplated action and its effects, and the rights available to him.  He declined to submit a statement in his own behalf, and he waived consideration of his case before a board of officers.

On 8 April 1971, the intermediate commander recommended that the recommendation be approved.

On 28 April 1971, the appropriate authority waived further counseling and rehabilitation and approved the recommendation for separation with a UD.

On 11 May 1971,the applicant was separated under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-212 with a UD for unfitness, frequent involvement in incidents of a discreditable nature with military or civilian authorities.  He had completed 
11 months and 17 days of active military service and he had a total of 263 days lost time due to being AWOL and in confinement.

Evidence of record indicates the applicant applied to the Army Discharge 
Review Board in 1998, which was past that boards 15-year statute of limitation.

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.  A UD was normally considered appropriate for such discharges.

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 Board concludes that the applicant was mentally responsible and able  
distinguish right from wrong and to adhere to the right.

3.	As a soldier the applicant had the duty to support and abide by the Army's 
alcohol and drug policies not to abuse alcohol or use drugs.  If in fact, he abused alcohol and used drugs, he knowingly risked his military career and diminished the quality of his service below that meriting a HD.

4.  Further, the Board concludes that all requirements of law and regulations were met and the rights of the applicant were fully protected throughout the separation process.

5.  The applicant’s discharge was appropriate because the quality of his service was not consistent with the Army’s standards for acceptable personal conduct and performance of duty by military personnel.  

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

RKM____  RVO____  SK______  DENY APPLICATION

						Loren G. Harrell
						Director

INDEX

CASE ID	AR1999023785	
SUFFIX		
RECON	YYYYMMDD	
DATE BOARDED	19991216	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE	(UD)	
DATE OF DISCHARGE	19710511	
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY	AR635-212	
DISCHARGE REASON	A04.00	
BOARD DECISION	(DENY)	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.	144.0400	
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.