MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:   

	BOARD DATE:           24 February 2000                   
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR1999027252

	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.

	Mrs. Nancy Amos		Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Ms. Celia L. Adolphi		Chairperson	
	Mr. James P. Huber		Member	
	Ms. Margaret V. Thompson		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 DD Form 214 be corrected to show that he was never absent without leave (AWOL).

APPLICANT STATES:  That he was not aware of the AWOL time on his          DD Form 214 until he received a letter from the VA.  He was not AWOL.  He had requested a 3-day furlough over Easter weekend.  He was unable to return in time and had called his first sergeant who told him that would be fine and he would take care of it.  Also, it was his understanding that even though a person is AWOL he is still in the service.  He provides no supporting evidence.

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

He was inducted into the Army on 2 February 1967.

On 6 March 1967, the applicant completed a mental status evaluation.  He was found to be mentally responsible, capable of distinguishing right from wrong and of adhering to the right and to have the mental capacity to understand and participate in board proceedings.  He was found to have a character or behavior disorder classified as passive-aggressive personality, chronic, severe.

On 6 April 1967, the applicant accepted non-judicial punishment under Article 15, Uniform Code of Military Justice for being AWOL from 27 March to “on or about 1445 hours 4 March (sic) 1967.  (This is a typographical error.  His Personnel Qualification Record shows the correct return-to-military-control date of 3 April 1967.)  He did not submit any matters in extenuation, mitigation or defense and he did not appeal the Article 15.

On 6 April 1967, the company commander recommended the applicant be separated under Army Regulation 635-212 for unsuitability because he was unable to adapt to military life due to his lack of formal education.  The applicant was advised of his rights by counsel.  He waived consideration of his case by a board of officers, waived personal appearance before such a board; elected not to make a statement on his behalf; and waived representation by counsel.

On 26 April 1967, the appropriate authority approved the recommendation and directed issuance of a General Discharge Certificate.

On 4 May 1967, the applicant was discharged, with a general discharge, in pay grade E-1 under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-212 for unsuitability.  He had completed 2 months and 26 days of creditable active service and had 8 days of lost time.  He signed his DD Form 214.

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, sexual perversion, drug addiction or the unauthorized use or possession of habit-forming drugs or marijuana, an established pattern for shirking, an established pattern showing dishonorable failure to pay just debts or failure to contribute adequate support to dependents, were subject to separation for unfitness.  Such action would be taken when it was clearly established that despite attempts to rehabilitate or develop him as a satisfactory soldier further effort was unlikely to succeed.

The Department of Defense Financial Management Regulation, Volume 7A, chapter 1 states that lost time is not creditable towards longevity.

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 notes that the applicant did not present any matters in defense during his Article 15 proceeding and he did not appeal the Article 15.  That was the appropriate time to bring up his first sergeant’s permission to be a few days late returning from furlough, not 33 years after he signed his DD Form 214 that showed his time lost, AWOL period when there is no evidence to support his claim.

3.  The applicant is correct in his understanding that a person is still in the military service even though AWOL.  However, any time lost, such as AWOL time, is not creditable service for either pay purposes or for computing active Federal military service.

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

__cla___  __jph___  __mvt___  DENY APPLICATION

Karl F. Schneider
Director, Army Review Boards Agency

INDEX

CASE ID	AR1999027252	
SUFFIX		
RECON		
DATE BOARDED	20000224	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE		
DATE OF DISCHARGE		
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY		
DISCHARGE REASON		
BOARD DECISION	(DENY)	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.	123.01	
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.