MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:   

	BOARD DATE:           26 June 2003
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR2003087372

	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. Luis Almodova		Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Mr. Walter T. Morrison		Chairperson	
	Mr. Lester Echols		Member	
	Mr. Lawrence Foster		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 be upgraded.

APPLICANT STATES:  The applicant has submitted no evidence or an argument in support of his request.

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

The applicant enlisted in the US Army Reserve, Delayed Enlistment Program (DEP), on 1 April 1969.  On 16 April 1969, the applicant enlisted in the Regular Army for 3 years for training and assignment in Army Career Group 71, Administration.

The applicant was assigned to Company C, 6th Battalion, 2nd Basic Combat Training Brigade, Fort Dix, New Jersey, to undergo basic combat training.  

On 16 May 1969, the applicant received an Article 15 under the provisions of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) for going from his appointed place of duty in his unit without authority.  The imposed punishment was a forfeiture of $20.00 pay per month, for one month, and restriction and extra duties for 14 days, to run concurrently.  The applicant did not appeal the punishment imposed.

On 21 May 1969, the applicant received an Article 15 under the provisions of the UCMJ for being absent without leave (AWOL) from his unit from 13 May until 16 May 1969 and for having broken restriction to the limits of the company area.  The imposed punishment was a forfeiture of $50.00 for one month, restriction to the company area for thirty days, and to sign in every hour, on the hour, during off duty hours.  The applicant did not appeal the punishment imposed.

The applicant completed basic combat training on 22 June 1969 and was assigned to Company B, 3rd Battalion 5th Combat Support Training Brigade, on 23 June 1969, to undergo advanced individual training (AIT).  On 23 July 1969, the unit was redesignated as Company E, 2nd Battalion, 5th CST Brigade.

On 4 August 1969, while still in AIT, the applicant departed AWOL.  He remained in that status until 15 December 1970.  The record remains silent about all the circumstances and events that led to his discharge from the Army; but, an entry appears in Item 44 (Time Lost Under Section 972, Title 10, United States Code), of his DA Form 20, Enlisted Qualification Record, which shows that he was confined in the hands of civil authorities from 16 December until 11 February 1971.

There is evidence in the applicant's service personnel record that he was incarcerated in the New Jersey Reformatory at Annandale, New Jersey, and was paroled from that institution on 15 December 1970.

The applicant was discharged in the rank and pay grade, Private, E-1, with an undesirable discharge on 11 February 1971 under the provisions Army Regulation 635-206.  On his discharge, the applicant had completed 3 months and 15 days active Federal service and had 559 days lost due to AWOL and civil confinement.  The applicant's character of service was characterized as under other than honorable conditions.  He was awarded a SPN (separation program number) Code, 284, which identifies individuals who are discharged due to conviction by civil court or adjudged to be a juvenile offender during the current period of active duty.

The applicant’s record shows that the highest rank and pay grade he held on active duty was Private, E-1.  The record contains no documented acts of valor, achievement, or service warranting special recognition.

Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 3-7, provides that an honorable discharge is a separation with honor and entitles the recipient to benefits provided by law.  The honorable characterization is appropriate when the quality of the member’s service generally has met the standards of acceptable conduct and performance of duty for Army personnel, or is otherwise so meritorious that any other characterization would be clearly inappropriate.  Whenever there is doubt, it is to be resolved in favor of the individual.

Army Regulation 635-200, also defines a general discharge as a separation from the Army under honorable conditions.  When authorized, it is issued to a soldier whose military record is satisfactory but not sufficiently meritorious to warrant an honorable discharge.  A characterization of under honorable conditions may be issued only when the reason for separation specifically allows such characterization.

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 discharge proceedings are not available for the Board's review; however, 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 and the discharge certificate given are commensurate with his overall record of service.

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.  The Board noted the applicant's desire to have his undesirable discharge upgraded; however, there is no basis upon which to base an upgrade of the applicant's discharge considering the applicant's less than satisfactory record of service.

4.  The Board has determined that by entering into conduct that resulted in his being arrested, convicted, and incarcerated, the applicant diminished the quality of his service and did not meet the standards of acceptable conduct and performance expected of Army personnel; therefore, the applicant is not entitled to an upgrade of his undesirable discharge to an honorable or a general (under honorable conditions) discharge.

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

__wtm___  __le____  __lf____  DENY APPLICATION

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

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2003087372	
SUFFIX		
RECON		
DATE BOARDED	20030626	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE	UD	
DATE OF DISCHARGE	19710211	
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY	AR 635-206	
DISCHARGE REASON		
BOARD DECISION	DENY	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.	144.0000	
2.	144.6100	
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.