MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:   

	BOARD DATE:           2 April 2002
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR2001065662

	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. William Blakely		Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Mr. Walter T. Morrison		Chairperson	
	Mr. Curtis l. Greenway		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 undesirable discharge (UD) be upgraded. 

APPLICANT STATES:  In effect, that his UD was unjust because he was suffering from a Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) and should have been medically discharged.  In support of his application, he submits a copy of his separation document (DD Form 214).

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

The applicant entered the Army on 15 May 1967.  He successfully completed basic combat training and advanced individual training (AIT).  He was awarded military occupational specialty (MOS) 11B (Light Weapons Infantryman).  Upon completing training, he was assigned to the Republic of Vietnam for his first permanent duty station.

The record shows that the highest rank the applicant attained while serving on active duty was sergeant/E-5 and that he completed a tour in the RVN on 
27 October 1968.  He was then reassigned to Fort Benning, Georgia.  During his active duty tenure he earned the following awards:  National Defense Service Medal; Vietnam Service Medal with 4 bronze service stars; Republic of Vietnam Campaign Medal with 60 Device; Republic of Vietnam Gallantry Cross with Palm Unit Citation; and Combat Infantryman Badge.  

The applicant’s disciplinary records includes his acceptance of nonjudicial punishment (NJP) under the provisions of Article 15 of the Uniform Code Of Military Justice (UCMJ) on 20 January 1969, for being absent without leave (AWOL) from 28 December 1968 to 12 January 1969.  In addition, the applicant had a further extensive history of AWOL related offenses that totaled 2194 days. 

On 29 July 1975, a court-martial charge was preferred against him for the following two periods of AWOL:  18 September 1969 to 1 October 1969 and 
9 October 1969 to 9 July 1975.  The applicant, after consulting with legal counsel and being advised of the basis for the contemplated trial by court-martial; the maximum allowable punishment; and the possible effects of an UOTHC discharge, voluntarily requested to be discharged in lieu of trial by court-martial, under the provisions of chapter 10, Army Regulation 635-200.

On 10 September 1975, the appropriate authority approved the applicant’s discharge request and directed that he receive an UD and that he be reduced to the lowest enlisted grade.  On 30 September 1975, the applicant was discharged accordingly.  At the time of his discharge, he had completed 2 years, 3 months, and 12 days of creditable active military service and he had accrued a total of 2194 days of time lost due to AWOL. 
There is no indication in the record that the applicant suffered a medically disabling condition prior to discharge and on 24 October 1979, the Army Discharge Review Board determined the applicant’s discharge had been proper and equitable and denied his request for an upgrade to his discharge.

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.  The Board notes the applicant’s contention that PTSD impaired his ability to serve in the Army and that he should have been medically discharged.  However, it finds no evidence of record and the applicant has failed to provide independent evidence to support these claims. 

2.  The evidence of record shows the applicant was charged with the commission of an offense punishable under the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) with a punitive discharge.  After consulting with defense counsel, the applicant voluntarily, and in writing, requested separation from the Army in lieu of trial by court-martial.  In doing so, he admitted guilt to the stipulated offenses under the UCMJ.  

3.  The Board is satisfied that all requirements of law and regulation were met and the rights of the applicant were fully protected throughout the separation process.  Finally, the Board concludes that the applicant’s discharge accurately reflects his overall record of service. 

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

__WTM__  __CLG__  __RKS___  DENY APPLICATION

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

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2001065662	
SUFFIX		
RECON	2002/04/02	
DATE BOARDED	19750930	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE	(UOTHC)	
DATE OF DISCHARGE	YYYYMMDD	
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY	AR635-200. chapter 10 .  .  .  .  .  	
DISCHARGE REASON	In lieu of trial by court-martial	
BOARD DECISION	(DENY)	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.	70.00	
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.