MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:      

	BOARD DATE:           3 April 2003                  
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR2002077853

	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. G. E. Vandenberg		Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Mr. Samuel A. Crumpler		Chairperson	
	Mr. Roger W. Able		Member	
	Mr. Patrick H. McGann, Jr.		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 be upgraded.

APPLICANT STATES:  In effect, he needs an upgrade to under honorable conditions in order to receive Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) medical benefits and to go back to school.

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

The applicant entered active duty on 4 October 1966 and completed basic combat training and advanced individual training without incident.

On 1 March 1967, the applicant received nonjudicial punishment, under Article 15, Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ), for being absent without leave (AWOL) for 4 days.

He received three special court-martial convictions for being AWOL, on 24 October 1967, on 24 January 1968, and on 5 July 1968.  

The applicant went AWOL again on December 1968 and remained absent until 5 November 1970.

On 9 November 1970, the applicant’s command commenced actions to discharge him due to unfitness under Army Regulation 635-212.  

On 13 November, after consulting with military counsel, the applicant acknowledged this action and waived his rights to have his case considered by a board of officers, to personally appear before a board of officers, and to submit a statement on his own behalf.  He acknowledged that if he received an undesirable discharge (under other than honorable conditions) that he would be ineligible for many or all benefits as a veteran.

The discharge authority approved the request and directed that the applicant be discharged and given an undesirable discharge.  

The applicant was discharged on 11 December 1970, with a characterization of service of under other than honorable conditions.  He is shown to have 10 months and 14 days of creditable time with 1202 days lost due to being AWOL (920 days) or in military confinement (232 days). 

The applicant applied to the Army Discharge Review Board and was dened any relief on 13 March 1981.

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 and applicable law and regulations, it is concluded:

1.  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.

2.  Entitlement to VA benefits is not within the preview of this Board nor is it normally considered a basis for granting relief.

3.  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.

4.  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__  ___RWA_  ___PHM_  DENY APPLICATION

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

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2002077853	
SUFFIX		
RECON		
DATE BOARDED	20030403	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE		
DATE OF DISCHARGE		
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY		
DISCHARGE REASON		
BOARD DECISION	DENY	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.		
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.