MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:       

	BOARD DATE:            23 January 2001
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR2000046930

	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	
	Mr. Joseph A. Adriance		Analyst	

The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Mr. Luther L. Santiful		Chairperson	
	Mr. Walter T. Morrison		Member	
	Mr. Thomas E. O’Shaughnessy, Jr.		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 undesirable discharge (UD) be upgraded.  

APPLICANT STATES:  In effect, that he served his country in Vietnam and earned a Bronze Star Medal (BSM), Purple Heart (PH), Air Medal (AM), Combat Infantryman Badge (CIB), which he believes warrants an upgrade to his discharge.

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

On 2 May 1968, he enlisted in the Regular Army for three years.  He completed basic training at Fort Bliss, Texas and advanced individual training (AIT) at Fort Polk, Louisiana.  While in AIT, he went absent without leave (AWOL) from his unit for five days from 15 to 19 September 1968.  He was tried for this offense by a special court-martial and found guilty.  His sentence included confinement at hard labor for one month and a forfeiture of $73.00. 

Upon completion of AIT the applicant was assigned to Vietnam for his first permanent duty station.  He failed to report for shipment and was placed in an AWOL status on 12 January 1969.  He was dropped from the rolls of his organization on 11 February 1969 and remained away until returning to military control at Fort McPherson, Georgia on 6 March 1969.  He was tried for this offense by a special court-martial and found guilty, which resulted in a sentence to confinement at hard labor for three months (suspended) and a forfeiture of $60.00 per month for three months.

He arrived in Vietnam in May 1969 and his service record shows that during his tour in Vietnam he earned the CIB, Vietnam Service Medal, Vietnam Campaign Medal, and the Vietnam Cross of Gallantry with palm.  However, there is no evidence that indicates that he was ever cited for or earned an individual award for an act of valor, heroism, achievement, or service warranting special recognition.  

On 29 October 1970, while serving in Europe, the applicant again went AWOL from his unit and he was dropped from the rolls of his organization on 
29 November 1970.  He accrued 123 days of AWOL prior to his normal expiration of term of service (ETS) of 2 April 1971 and an additional 334 days subsequent to this ETS before returning to military control on 29 February 1972. 

There is no separation packet on file that contains the specific facts and circumstances of the applicant’s separation processing.  However, his service record does reflect that he was in pre-trial confinement from 1 March 1972 to 
25 April 1972 and that he served as a duty soldier at Fort Gordon, Georgia until his discharge on 27 June 1972.   

There is also a copy of a properly constituted Department of Defense (DD) Form 214 (Armed Forces of the United States Report of Transfer or Discharge) on file, which confirms the applicant was discharged on 27 June 1972, under the provisions of chapter 10, Army Regulation 635-200, by reason of “for the good of the service”.  It also shows that at the time of his separation he had completed 
2 years, 7 months, and 23 days of creditable active military service and that he had accrued a total of 581 days of time lost due to AWOL and confinement. 

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

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 discharge an UD was authorized.  

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 contention that his combat service, which included his earning the CIB, BSM, PH, and AM, warrants an upgrade to this discharge; however, concludes this claim lacks merit. 

2.  The evidence of record shows only that the applicant completed his Vietnam tour and earned the CIB.  It does not indicate that he earned any other individual awards for valor, heroism, achievement, or service warranting special recognition, which includes the BSM, PH, and AM.  Thus, lacking any supporting independent evidence from the applicant, the Board finds no basis for relief.

3.  The record is void of a separation packet containing the facts and circumstances pertaining to the applicant’s processing and the specific events that led to his discharge.  However, it does contain a properly constituted 
DD Form 214, which identifies the reason and characterization of the discharge.  Lacking evidence to the contrary, the Board presumed Government regularity in the discharge process.  

4.  The Board is satisfied that all requirements of law and regulation were met and the rights of the applicant were fully protected throughout the separation process, and that the characterization of the applicant’s service was commensurate with his entire record of service.

5.  The evidence of record shows the applicant was discharged under the provisions of chapter 10, Army Regulation 635-200, for the good of the service.  In connection with such a discharge, he would have been charged with the commission of an offense punishable under the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) with a punitive discharge.  Procedurally, he was required to consult with defense counsel, and to voluntarily, and in writing, request separation from the Army for the good of the service to avoid the consequences of the punitive discharge he may have received as a result of UCMJ action. 

6.  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.

7.  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

__wtm___  ___ls ___  __teo___  DENY APPLICATION

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

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2000046930	
SUFFIX		
RECON		
DATE BOARDED	2001/01/23	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE	UD	
DATE OF DISCHARGE	1972/06/27	
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY	AR 635-200	
DISCHARGE REASON		
BOARD DECISION	DENY	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.  189	110.0000	
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.