MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:      

	BOARD DATE:           24 May 2000                 
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR2000039936

	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. McKim-Spilker		Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Mr. John N. Slone		Chairperson	
	Mr. Mark D. Manning		Member	
	Ms. Meta Waller  		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 undesirable discharge (UD) be upgraded to an honorable discharge (HD).

APPLICANT STATES:  In effect, that clemency is warranted because it is an injustice for him to continue to suffer the adverse consequences of a bad discharge; that his military record shows promotions, awards, and decorations, and that he was generally a good soldier; that his record of nonjudicial punishment indicates only isolated or minor offenses; that his record of AWOL indicates only minor or isolated offenses; that personal problems, alcohol and drugs impaired his ability to serve; that the punishment he received was too harsh and that it was much worse than most people received for the same offense; and, that he should have received a medical discharge because he was not medically qualified to serve. 

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

On 12 February 1971 he was inducted into the U.S. Army for a period of 2 years. He successfully completed basic combat training and advanced individual training in military occupational specialty 64B (Heavy Vehicle Driver) at Fort Polk, Louisiana.  

On 1 June 1971 he departed Fort Polk, Louisiana in casual status en route to Vietnam.

The applicant’s record documents that the highest permanent rank he held on active duty was specialist/E-4.  He received the National Defense Service Medal, Vietnam Service Medal and Vietnam Campaign Medal.

On 19 July 1971 he accepted nonjudicial punishment (NJP) under the provisions of Article 15, UCMJ, for AWOL (1-16 July 1971).  The punishment imposed consisted of a reduction to private/E-1 (suspended) and a forfeiture of $25.

On 16 April 1972 he departed Vietnam in casual status en route to Fort Carson, Colorado.

On 11 July 1972 he accepted NJP for AWOL (15 May-30 June 1972).  The punishment imposed consisted of a reduction to private first class/E-3, a forfeiture of $166 pay per month for 2 months (suspended), and 30 days restriction (suspended).

On 25 July 1972 he again departed AWOL and remained so absent until he was apprehended by civilian authorities on 16 December 1972.

On 27 December 1972 he requested a discharge under the provisions of chapter 10, AR 635-200, in lieu of trial by court-martial.  The appropriate authority approved his request for discharge.  Accordingly, on 9 February 1973 he was discharged with an Undesirable Discharge Certificate.  He was credited with 1 year, 7 months and 3 days of active military service in the period under review and a total of 148 days 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 UD is normally considered appropriate. 

There is no evidence that the applicant applied to the Army Discharge Review Board (ADRB) for discharge upgrade within its 15-year statute of limitations.

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’s voluntary request for separation under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 10, for the good of the service, to avoid trial by court-martial, was administratively correct and in conformance with applicable regulations.  There is no indication that the request was made under coercion or duress.

2.  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.

3.  There is no evidence in the record nor has the applicant submitted any evidence to support that his ability to serve was impaired by personal problems, drugs or alcohol or that he was not medically qualified to serve.

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

__JNS___  _MDM__  _MW____  DENY APPLICATION

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

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2000039936	
SUFFIX		
RECON		
DATE BOARDED	20000524	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE	UD	
DATE OF DISCHARGE	19730209	
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY	AR 635-200 C10 	
DISCHARGE REASON	144.7100.0000	
BOARD DECISION	DENY	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.	144.9235.0000	
2.	144.9237.0000	
3.	144.9309.0000	
4.	144.0100.0000	
5.		
6.