MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION


         IN THE CASE OF:
        


         BOARD DATE: 17 January 2002
         DOCKET NUMBER: AR200163459

         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
Ms. Stephanie Thompkins		Analyst

The following members, a quorum, were present:

Ms. Jennifer L. Prater		Chairperson
Mr. Christopher J. Prosser		Member
Mr. Kenneth W. Lapin		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 (UOTHC) be upgraded to a general or honorable discharge. He also requests award of the Combat Infantryman Badge (CIB).

APPLICANT STATES: That he was not in his right frame of mind because of all the drugs he was taking and the reason he did the drugs was to forget everything around him. He submits a self-authored letter, dated 9 September 2001, a copy of his Veterans Administration Form 21-526 (Veteran’s Application for Compensation and/or Pension), and a copy of his separation document (DD Form 214) in support of his application.

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

He enlisted in the Regular Army as a private, pay grade E-1, on 31 December 1968.

He was reported absent without leave (AWOL) from 31 December 1968 to 5 January 1969, and 12 through 25 May 1969.

On 3 June 1969, he was punished under Article 15, Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ), for AWOL. His punishment included forfeiture of pay and detainment in correctional custody for a period of 7 days.

On 13 October 1969, he was punished under Article 15, UCMJ, for absence from his unit and, through neglect, missing a movement flight. His punishment included reduction to pay grade E-2, a forfeiture, and restriction until shipment.

He was reported AWOL on 15 November 1970. He was dropped from the rolls on 14 December 1970. He was returned to military control on 31 December 1970.

He was reported AWOL on 23 May 1971. He was dropped from the rolls on 24 May 1971.

On 6 March 1972, he was charged with one specification of AWOL from 23 May 1971 to 1 March 1972.

On 7 March 1972, he was advised of his rights and voluntarily stated that he just could not get along with the Army and did not like being told what to do. He also stated that he would keep going AWOL and did not care what type of discharge he would receive and he just wanted to get out of the Army.




On 10 March 1972, after consulting with legal counsel, the applicant voluntarily requested discharge for the good of the service. He elected not to submit a statement in his own behalf and acknowledged he understood he may be discharged under other than honorable conditions and the results of the issuance of such a discharge.

On 22 March 1972, the appropriate authority approved his request for discharge, directed that a UOTHC discharge be furnished, and that he be reduced to pay grade E-1.

He was separated on 30 March 1972, under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 10, for the good of the service in lieu of trial by court-martial. He had a total of 2 years, 5 months, and 26 days net active service and 278 days of lost time due to AWOL. His awards include the National Defense Service Medal, the Vietnam Service Medal, the Vietnam Campaign Medal w/60 device and the Expert Badge-M14 Rifle.

His records do not show entitlement to or award of the CIB. During his period of service his military occupational specialty was Armor Reconnaissance Specialist, 11D10.

There is no evidence that the applicant applied to the Army Discharge Review Board within their 15-year statute of limitations.

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 UOTHC is normally considered appropriate.

Paragraph 3-7 of this regulation provides that an honorable discharge is a separation with honor. The honorable characterization is appropriate when the quality of the member's service generally has met the standards of acceptable conduct and performance of duty for Army personnel, or is otherwise so meritorious that any other characterization would be inappropriate.

Army Regulation 600-8-22 provides, in pertinent part, that the CIB is awarded to infantry officers and enlisted personnel who have an infantry MOS. They must have served in active ground combat while assigned or attached to an infantry





unit of brigade, regimental, or smaller size. The Awards Branch, Total Army Personnel Command, has advised, in similar cases, that during the Vietnam era the CIB was awarded only to enlisted soldiers who held and served in MOS 11B, 11C, 11F, 11G or 11H.

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. In view of the circumstances in this case, the applicant is not entitled to an upgrade of his discharge. He has not shown error, injustice, or inequity for the relief he now requests.

2. The Board notes his contention that his drug use caused him to not be in the right frame of mind during his military service. However, there is no evidence of record to substantiate the applicant's claim that military authorities were aware of any type or extent of his drug problem. The applicant never stated that because he was on drugs he wanted to get out of the Army, he stated he did not like the Army and being told what to do. He chose to request an administrative discharge rather than risk the consequences of a court-martial. Although he may now feel that he made the wrong choice, he should not be allowed to change his mind at this late date.

3. His voluntary request for separation under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 10 to avoid trial by court-martial, was administratively correct and in conformance with applicable regulations. There is no indication that the request was made under coercion or duress.

4. The Board further notes his request for the CIB. However, the applicant’s records do not show entitlement to the CIB.

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 this 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

_jlp____ _kwl____ __cjp___ DENY APPLICATION

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

---

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2001063459
SUFFIX
RECON
DATE BOARDED	20020117
TYPE OF DISCHARGE
DATE OF DISCHARGE
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY
DISCHARGE REASON
BOARD DECISION	DENY
REVIEW AUTHORITY
ISSUES 1.	A70
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.