MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION


	IN THE CASE OF:         
	      

	BOARD DATE:              15 July 1998                
	DOCKET NUMBER:      AC97-07951

	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.  The following members, a quorum, were present:



	The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein.

	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 to an honorable discharge (HD).

APPLICANT STATES:  In effect, that he had a great record and because of one incident he was discharged; that at the time of his discharge he did not know he had a mental problem; that he spent 2 years in a mental institution; and that he was trying to file for a service connected disability with the VA.

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

On 28 May 1968 the applicant was inducted into the Army of the United States for a period of 2 years at the age of 20.  The applicant successfully completed basic training at Fort Polk, Louisiana and was assigned to Fort Gordon, Georgia to attend advanced individual training (AIT) for training in military occupational specialty (MOS) 95B (Military Police).

The applicant’s record documents no significant acts of achievement, valor, or service warranting special recognition.  The highest grade the applicant held on active duty was private/E-2 and he received no awards in his just under 
5 months of service.  However, the evidence of record does document an extensive record of disciplinary infractions, while the applicant was still in AIT, which included his acceptance of nonjudicial punishment, under the provisions of Article 15 of the UCMJ, on three separate occasions.

On 20 August 1968 the applicant accepted an NJP for failing to go to his prescribed place of duty on 17 August 1968.  His punishment for this offense was forfeiture of $12.00 and 14 days of restriction and extra duty.

On 18 September 1968 the applicant accepted his second NJP for being AWOL from 7 to 13 September 1968.  The resultant punishment for this offense was a forfeiture of $35.00 per month for two months.  

On 23 October 1968 the applicant accepted his last NJP for a violation of uniform policy by appearing in Augusta, Georgia in a fatigue (AG 107) uniform.  His punishment was a forfeiture of $35.00 per month for 2 months.

On 26 October 1968 the applicant underwent a psychiatric evaluation at the request of his unit commander.  The Psychiatrist found no evidence of a mental condition that would warrant hospitalization, or other disposition through medical channels.  His diagnosis was that the applicant “intended, upon his entrance into the Army to get out”.  He further commented that he found “no evidence to indicate a boardable psychiatric condition”.

On 24 October 1968 the applicant's unit commander recommended the applicant be separated for unfitness, under the provisions of AR 635-212, and furnished a UD.

The unit commander's recommendation was based on the applicant’s frequent incidents of a discreditable nature with military authorities.  The commander further commented that the applicant’s conduct with regard to military authority and/or applicability to the ordered life, and regimentation of the military environment are not within the score of retention.  

On 25 October 1968 the applicant consulted counsel and completed his election of rights by waiving his to right to have his case considered by a board of officers, and to personally appear before a board of officers.  Additionally, he elected not to submit a statement in his own behalf, certified his understanding of the possibility that he could encounter substantial prejudice based on receiving a UD, and that there could be a loss of benefits as a veteran under federal and state law.  

On 25 October 1968 the applicant underwent a complete physical examination which resulted in no findings of any physical or mental conditions.  At this time competent medical authority cleared the applicant for separation. 

On 30 October 1968 the appropriate authority approved the separation action and directed the applicant be discharged for unfitness and furnished a UD.  Accordingly, on 1 November 1968 the applicant was discharged after completing 4 months, 29 days of active military service and accruing 6 days of time lost due to AWOL.

Army Regulation 635-212, then in effect, provided in pertinent part the policies, procedures, and guidance for the prompt elimination of enlisted personnel who were determined to be unfit for further military service.  Individuals discharged under this regulation would normally be issued a UD.

There is no evidence the applicant applied to the Army Discharge Review Board (ADRB) for an upgrade of his discharge within the 15 year statute of limitations.

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 Board found no corroborating evidence that the applicant was suffering from a mental illness at the time of his separation or that his mental problems are service connected which would qualify him for VA benefits.  Service medical records show the applicant underwent a psychiatric evaluation, and a complete physical examination, just prior to his discharge.  At this time competent medical authority determined that the applicant was medically fit for retention or the appropriate separation, with no disqualifying physical or mental conditions.  Additionally, the applicant declined counsel, waived his right to a hearing before a board of officers, was advised of the effects of a UD, and stated his understanding that he might be deprived of many or all Army and VA benefits.  The applicant was also afforded the opportunity to submit statements in his own behalf but declined to do so.

2.  The evidence of record does not support the applicant’s claim that his service prior to separation was great and he was discharged based on one incident.  The record shows no acts of valor, achievement, or service warranting special recognition; however, documents an extensive record of disciplinary infractions for such a short period of service. 

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 the aforementioned 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

________  ________  ________  DENY APPLICATION




						Loren G. Harrell
						Director