MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:       

	BOARD DATE:            8 August 2000
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR1999034113

	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. Jessie B. Strickland		Analyst	

The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Mr. Stanley Kelley		Chairperson	
	Mr. James E. Anderholm		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 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 to a more favorable discharge.

APPLICANT STATES:  In effect, that he is unable to obtain employment anywhere and desires to have his discharge upgraded.

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

He was inducted in Indianapolis, Indiana on 29 January 1968 and was transferred to Fort Campbell, Kentucky to undergo his basic combat training (BCT).  He successfully completed his BCT and was transferred to Fort Lee, Virginia to undergo advanced individual training (AIT) as a unit and organizational supply specialist. 

Although there is no evidence of punishment imposed in the available records, his records indicate that he went absent without leave (AWOL) from 9 April to 16 April 1968.

He completed his AIT, was promoted to the pay grade of E-4 on 5 July 1968 and was transferred to Germany on 6 August 1968. 

On 23 January 1969 he went AWOL and remained absent until he was returned to military control at Fort Leonard Wood, Missouri on 23 February 1970. 

He underwent a psychiatric evaluation on 24 March 1970 in connection with consideration to eliminate him from the service under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-212.  The examining psychiatrist indicated that the applicant had found out after being in Germany for 6 months that his girl friend was pregnant, so he got a leave to go home.  After arriving at home his girl friend had a miscarriage and his stepfather deserted his mother.  Financial problems in the family were so great that he elected not to return to his unit.  The examining psychiatrist cleared him for any administrative action deemed appropriate by the commander and indicated that if the applicant was not discharged, he would probably go AWOL again.

On 7 April 1970 the applicant’s commander initiated action to separate the applicant from the service under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-212 for unfitness.  In the process of doing so, the applicant was notified and acknowledged by his signature that he had the right to appear before a board of officers, to submit a statement in his own behalf, to be represented by counsel, and to waive any or all of his rights.

After consulting with counsel, the applicant waived all of his rights and acknowledged that he understood that he could expect to encounter substantial prejudice in civilian life and the possible loss of benefits if he was discharged with less than an honorable discharge.

The appropriate authority (a Major General) approved the recommendation for discharge on 23 April 1970 and directed that he be issued an Undesirable Discharge Certificate.

Accordingly, he was discharged under other than honorable conditions on 30 April 1970 under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-212 for unfitness.  He had served 1 year, 1 month and 24 days of total active service and had 379 days of lost time due to AWOL.

The applicant applied to the Army Discharge Review Board (ADRB) on 25 May 1971 requesting that his discharge be upgraded to a general or honorable discharge.  He cites at that time that the basis for his request was that he went AWOL because of the tremendous problems he was having at home and that he was advised that waiving his rights was the quickest way for him to get back home where he was so badly needed.  The ADRB determined that he was properly discharged and denied his request.

The applicant’s discharge was again reviewed by the ADRB on 24 January 1978 to determine if he was eligible for an upgrade of his discharge under the Special Discharge Review Program (SDRP).  The ADRB again determined that he was properly discharged, that he did not qualify for an upgrade of his discharge under the SDRP, and again denied his request for an upgrade of his discharge. 

Army Regulation 635-212, in effect at the time, set forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel.  It provided, in pertinent part, that members involved in frequent incidents of a discreditable nature with civil or military authorities were subject to separation for unfitness.  An undesirable discharge 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.  The applicant’s administrative discharge under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-212 was accomplished in accordance with applicable regulations with no indication of any violations of the applicant’s rights.

2.  Accordingly, the type of discharge directed and the reasons therefore appear to be appropriate considering all of the facts of the case.

3.  The Board notes that the applicant claimed to have personal problems at home and that his presence was deemed necessary.  However, he has not provided any evidence to substantiate his claim and he has failed to show through the evidence submitted with his application or the evidence of record that his going AWOL was unavoidable or that he made any attempts to make his chain of command aware or sought any assistance before resorting to going AWOL.

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

___sk___  ___ja____  __reb ___  DENY APPLICATION

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

INDEX

CASE ID	AR1999034113	
SUFFIX		
RECON		
DATE BOARDED	2000/08/08	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE	UD	
DATE OF DISCHARGE	1970/04/30	
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY	AR635-212	
DISCHARGE REASON	592/UNFIT	
BOARD DECISION	DENY	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.  583	144.5100/A51.00	
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.