MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:     

	BOARD DATE:           27 January 1999                   
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR1999014789

	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. Loren G. Harrell		Director	
	Ms. Beverly A. Young		Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Mr. James E. Vick		Chairperson	
	Ms. Margaret K. Patterson		Member	
	Mr. John H. Kern		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:  That his discharge under other than honorable conditions be recharacterized to honorable.

APPLICANT STATES:  That he believes that the less than honorable discharge, was “unjust”.  He further states that he made numerous requests to his superiors to request leave to work on his destructive marriage at that time which was denied and even though he made destructive choices, he was a good soldier.

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

The applicant initially enlisted in the Regular Army on 29 December 1966 and reenlisted on 15 December 1967 for a period of four years.  He completed basic and advanced individual training as an infantryman and was assigned to Germany.  

The applicant received non judicial punishment (NJP) on three separate occasions for being absent without leave (AWOL), for being derelict in the performance of his duties and for failing to go to his appointed place of duty.  In April 1970, the applicant received a special court-martial for two specifications of AWOL.  He was confined at hard labor for two months and forfeited $40 pay for two months.  In August 1970, he again received another NJP for being AWOL and while being in AWOL status, he was arrested by civil authorities, convicted of disturbing the peace and sentenced to two months confinement. 

On 4 August 1970, the applicant was notified of pending separation under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-212, chapter 6, paragraph 6a(1) for unfitness.
The applicant waived consultation with counsel, waived a hearing by a board of officers and submitted a statement in his own behalf.  He underwent a psychiatric and a medical evaluation and was found to be fit for separation.

On 13 November 1970, the separation authority waived counseling and rehabilitation requirements, approved the recommendation for discharge and directed an undesirable discharge.  The applicant was discharged on 20 November 1970.  He had a total of 3 years, 3 months and 3 days of creditable service and 230 days of lost time.

Army Regulation 635-212, in effect at the time, set forth the basic authority for the elimination of enlisted personnel.  Paragraph 6 of the regulation provided, in pertinent part, that an individual was subject to separation for unfitness because of frequent incidents of a discreditable nature with civil or military authorities. When separation for unfitness was warranted 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, and advisory opinion(s), it is concluded:

1.  The applicant was advised of the effects of a discharge under other than honorable conditions and that he might be deprived of many or all Army and VA benefits. 

2.  The discharge proceedings were 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.  The applicant's administrative separation was accomplished in compliance with applicable regulations with no indication of procedural errors which would tend to jeopardize his rights.

4.  The type of discharge directed and the reasons therefore were appropriate considering all the facts of the case.

5.  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 the aforementioned requirement.

6.  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

JEV____  MKP_____  JHK_____  DENY APPLICATION

						Loren G. Harrell
						Director

INDEX

CASE ID	AR1999014789	
SUFFIX		
RECON	YYYYMMDD	
DATE BOARDED	19990127	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE	UD	
DATE OF DISCHARGE	19701113	
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY	AR 635-212, chapter 6, para 6a(1) 	
DISCHARGE REASON	Unfitness	
BOARD DECISION	DENY	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.	110.00	
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.