MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:   

	BOARD DATE:           1 August 2002
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR2002072940

	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	
	Mrs. Joyce A. Hall		Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Mr. Samuel A. Crumpler		Chairperson	
	Mr. Melvin H. Meyer		Member	
	Ms. Regan K. Smith		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 discharge under other than honorable conditions (UOTHC) be upgraded.

APPLICANT STATES:  In effect, that he was honorably discharged on 29 May 1969 and he reenlisted on 30 May 1969 while serving in the Republic of Vietnam (RVN).  He started having problems after his reenlistment.  He believes his problems were associated with Post Traumatic Stress Disorder.  He further states that he was living a troubled life during his military years; however, due to his involvement in church he has turned his life around.  

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

On 14 July 1967, the applicant enlisted in the Regular Army for 3 years.  He completed the required training and was awarded military occupational specialty 11B10 (Light Weapons Infantryman).  On or about 18 March 1968, the applicant departed for the Republic of Vietnam (RVN).  

Between August and November 1968, the applicant accepted nonjudical punishment (NJP) under Article 15, Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) twice, both times for failure to go to his appointed place of duty.  His punishments included a forfeiture of $25.00 pay and a reduction to pay grade E-3.

On 29 May 1969, the applicant was honorably discharged for the purpose of immediate reenlistment.  On 30 May 1969, the applicant reenlisted for 3 years.
On or about 18 July 1969, the applicant departed the RVN for assignment at Fort Hood, Texas.  He was assigned to Company B, 1st Battalion, 1st Brigade, 41st Infantry, 2nd Armored Division.  

Between 25 October 1969 and 20 October 1970, the applicant accepted 
NJP seven times for offenses including failure to go to his appointed place of duty, disobeying a lawful order, and for being absent without leave.  His punishments included forfeitures, restrictions, extra duty, and multiple reductions.

The facts and circumstances pertaining to the applicant’s discharge are missing from his file.  Veterans Administration Request for Information (VA Form 
07-3101) dated 9 May 1973, filed in the applicant’s service record shows that the facts and circumstances surrounding his discharge were forwarded to the Regional Office in Atlanta, Georgia.

The applicant’s record shows that he was discharged on 16 December 
1970, in pay grade E-1, under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-212 for unfitness with a discharge UOTHC.  His Armed Forces of the United States Report of Transfer or Discharge (DD Form 214) shows that he completed 1 year, 3 months, and 15 days of creditable active service for this enlistment period.  His DD Form 214 also shows multiple periods of AWOL.
Army Regulation 635-212, in effect at the time, set forth the basic authority for separation of enlisted personnel.  The regulation provided, in pertinent part, that commanders would separate a member when, in the commander’s judgment, it was clearly established that the member would not develop sufficiently to become a satisfactory soldier.  When separated for unfitness (misconduct), a discharge UOTHC was normally considered appropriate.

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 this requirement.

2.  In the absence of the applicant’s discharge proceedings the Board can only presume that the applicant’s discharge was conducted in accordance with law and regulations applicable at the time.  The character of the discharge is commensurate with the applicant’s overall record of military service.

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

__SAC__  __MHM__  __RKS__  DENY APPLICATION

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

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2002072940	
SUFFIX		
RECON	YYYYMMDD	
DATE BOARDED	2002/08/01	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE	UOTHC	
DATE OF DISCHARGE	1970/12/16	
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY	AR635-212	
DISCHARGE REASON	A51.00	
BOARD DECISION	DENY	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.	144.5000	
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.