MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:        

	BOARD DATE:             19 September 2002                         
	DOCKET NUMBER:     AR2002072379

	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. Antoinette Farley		Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Ms. Joann H. Langston		Chairperson	
	Ms. Melinda M. Darby		Member	
	Mr. Ronald E. Blakely		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 the application was filed within the time established by statute, and if not, whether it would be in the interest of justice to waive the failure to timely file.

	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 be upgraded.  

APPLICANT STATES:  That while he was in the Army, he made some bad choices and got into some trouble.  He adds that he served one tour in the Republic of Vietnam (RVN), two years and eight months in the Army and is now 52 years old and disabled.  He does not want his children or grandchildren to know he did not receive an honorable discharge, even upon his death.

EVIDENCE OF RECORD:  The applicant's military records are limited in that they do not contain separation processing documents.  

His records show that on 9 February 1968, he enlisted in the Regular Army for 
3 years.  He completed his military training and was awarded military occupational specialty of 67B (01/U6 Airplane Repairman) on 18 April 1968.  He reported for duty in RVN on 1 August 1968, was advanced to pay grade E-3 in September and to pay grade E-4 on December 1968.

On 4 January 1969, the applicant accepted non-judicial punishment (NJP) under Article 15, Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ), for being absent without leave (AWOL) on 1 January 1969 and for failing to go to his place of duty on 
2 January 1969.  His punishment included reduction to pay grade E-1 and restriction for sixty days.

On 9 January 1969, the applicant received his second NJP for AWOL on 
7 January 1969 and for willfully disobeying a superior officer.  His punishment included forfeiture of $25.00 per month for two months.

On 6 July 1969, the applicant received his third NJP for willfully disobeying a lawful order given to him by his superior non-commissioned officer.  His punishment included reduction in grade from E-3 to E-2 and forfeiture of 
$68.00 pays for two months.

He returned to the United States on 21 July 1969 and was assigned to Fort Ord, California, for duty.

On 5 November 1969, the applicant received his fourth NJP for disobeying a lawful order.  His punishment included restriction for fourteen days.

He was transferred to Germany on 10 February 1970.

On 9 June 1970, the applicant received his fifth NJP of record, for being absent from his place of duty on 16, 26, 27 and 28 May 1970 and AWOL on 28 May 1970.  His punishment included forfeiture of $29.00 pay for one month and restriction for fourteen days.

On 30 July 1970, the applicant received his last NJP for being absent from his place of duty on 9, 10, 16, 22, 23 and 24 July 1970.  His punishment included reduction in grade to E-2, seven days of extra duty and fourteen days restriction. 

On 28 July 1970, AE Form 3087 (Report of Psychiatric Evaluation) shows that the applicant was diagnosed as having an immature personality, chronic, moderate, manifested by passive-aggressive behavior, manipulation, strange dreams and ineffective feelings.  The psychiatric findings cleared the applicant for discharge.

On 17 August 1970, a physical examination found the applicant qualified for separation with a physical profile of 111111.  

On 20 August 1970, the medical officer, after review of the applicant’s psychiatric evaluation and separation medical examinations, determined that under the retention medical standards prescribed in chapter 3, Army Regulation 40-501, that the individual was and is mentally responsible, able to distinguish right from wrong and to adhere to the right, and has the mental capacity to understand and participate in board proceedings.

Special Orders 249, Headquarters, 3rd Infantry Division dated 30 September 1970, indicates that the applicant was reduced to pay grade E-1 by NJP on 
30 September 1970.

On 12 October 1970, Department of Army, Headquarters, US Army Personnel Center, Fort Dix, New Jersey issued Special Orders Number 285 to separate the applicant under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, under conditions other than honorable with an undesirable discharge certificate, DD Form 258A.  The applicant’s assigned Separation Program Designator (SPD) Code of SPN 246, translates to “discharge for the good of the service”, under chapter 10, Army Regulation 635-200.

He was issued an Undesirable Discharge Certificate.  His DD Form 214 shows that he had 2 years, 8 months and 1 day of creditable service.  The highest pay grade he attained was E-4.

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 an undesirable discharge.

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 the absence of evidence to the contrary, it is presumed that the discharge proceedings were conducted in accordance with law and regulations applicable at the time.  The character of the discharge is commensurate with his overall record.

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 this requirement.

3.  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

__JHL   __  __MMD__  ___REB _  DENY APPLICATION

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

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2002072379	
SUFFIX		
RECON		
DATE BOARDED	20020919	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE	UD 	
DATE OF DISCHARGE	19740614	
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY	AR635-200, Ch 10 .  .  .  .  .  	
DISCHARGE REASON		
BOARD DECISION	DENY	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.	A110.02	
2.	A94.07	
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.