MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:   

	BOARD DATE:             5 April 2001                 
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR2000045116

	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. Carolyn G. Wade		Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Ms. June Hajjar 		Chairperson	
	Ms. Celia L. Adolphi 		Member	
	Mr. Harry B. Oberg 		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 (UD) discharge be upgraded to general, under honorable conditions.

APPLICANT STATES:  In effect, that he had mental and medical conditions that impaired his ability to serve in the military.  In support of his request, the applicant submitted five letters of references. 

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

He enlisted on 15 June 1971 in the Regular Army for a period of 2 years.  Following basic combat training at Fort Jackson, South Carolina, the applicant, was transferred to Fort Gordon, Georgia for advanced individual training (AIT).  The applicant left in an absent without leave (AWOL) status prior to reporting for AIT.

Between 9 September 1971 and 6 June 1972, the applicant accumulated 2 periods (9 September - 8 October 1971 and 20 October 1971 – 6 June 1972) of AWOL.

On 7 June 1972, the applicant was charged with the above periods of AWOL and held in the Fort Jackson post stockade.  After being counseled by his commanding officer, not a member of the Judge Advocate General Corps, the applicant voluntarily requested discharge for the good of the service in lieu of trial by court-martial, under the provisions of chapter 10, AR 635-200.  This request was made after counsel advised the applicant of the contemplated trial by court-martial, the maximum punishment, and the possible effects of a UD.  The applicant attested to the fact that he fully understood that he would be deprived of many or all Army benefits, that he may be ineligible for many or all benefits administered by the Department of Veteran Affairs (VA), and that he may be deprived of many veteran benefits under state law.

On 19 June 1972, the appropriate authority approved the applicant’s request for discharge from the Army with a UD and reduction to private/E-1.  Accordingly, on 21 June 1972, the applicant was discharged from the Army after completing 3 months and 22 days of active military service and accruing 255 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; however, at the time of the applicant's 
separation the regulation provided for the issuance of a UD.
There is no evidence of record that the applicant applied to the Army Discharge Review Board within its 15-year statue 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 Board noted the applicant’s contentions; however, neither the evidence submitted by the applicant, nor the evidence of record supports the applicant’s contentions that his misconduct was due to medical or mental problems.  The evidence of record indicates the applicant was medically examined and with the exception of a profile for hearing loss, was found fit for duty, including Vietnam.

2.  The applicant’s voluntary request for separation under the provisions of chapter 10, Army Regulation 635-200 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.

3.  The discharge was in accordance with law and regulations applicable at the time.  The character of the discharge is commensurate with his overall record.

4.  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 this requirement

5.  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

__jh____  __cla ____  __hbo___  DENY APPLICATION

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

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2000045116	
SUFFIX		
RECON		
DATE BOARDED	20010405	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE	UD	
DATE OF DISCHARGE	19720621	
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY	AR 635-200, c10	
DISCHARGE REASON	For the Good of the Service	
BOARD DECISION	DENY	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.	144.9321	
2.	144.9323	
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.