MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION


         IN THE CASE OF:
                                   


         BOARD DATE: 12 September 2002
         DOCKET NUMBER: AR2002070442

         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. W. W. Osborn, Jr.		Analyst

The following members, a quorum, were present:

Mr. John N. Slone		Chairperson
Mr. Donald P. Hupman, Jr.		Member
Mr. William D. Powers		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 general discharge be upgraded to honorable and that the reason and authority be changed.

APPLICANT STATES: In effect, that he quit high school and joined the Army to help his family. However, his leaving home had an adverse affect on his younger, teenage siblings. Following training he was stationed in Germany. Although he sent money to his mother, a single parent, he worried increasingly about his family. He began to drink to relieve stress and even tried marijuana a few times. He reenlisted for orders to Vietnam in order to get the bonus and 30 days leave. Although helping his family was his primary motivation he also wanted to make a contribution to the nation's war effort.

His leave at home was one of the best periods of his family's life. He purchased a car for his mother and his presence seemed to be beneficial to his younger brother and sister.

After he got to Vietnam he became disillusioned with his contributions (he was mostly assigned to guard duty) and his mother seemed to grow more distraught about her situation and the behavior of his siblings. He started drinking again and began to use drugs to cope. He even tried heroin a few times but did not become addicted. He asked what he could do to get sent home and as a result he was returned to the United States and discharged. He never really understood why.

His being home did not help much because of his own substance abuse. He has been in prison on a drug related charge for 9 years and 8 months and, "have a couple of more years to do on my sentence." The biggest change in his life is his faith in Jesus Christ. He has always been proud but truthful about his service. He has never claimed to have been in combat. He believes that he did his best and served honorably.

He believes that youth and immaturity impaired his ability to serve. That the lack of a father figure in his early life impaired his ability to serve as did his family, personal and financial problems. In effect, his record on nonjudicial punishments under the provisions of Article 15, Uniform Code of Military Justice showed only minor offenses. He received awards and was advanced to specialist four (E-4) in less than a year. An upgrade would improve his prospects for being paroled. An upgrade would help heal the stigma of Vietnam veterans as the losers of a lost war. An upgrade would significantly aid his personal fight against the feeling of having been categorized a quitter and a loser. He has not wasted his time in prison. He has participated in drug abuse classes. By the time he is released, he will have a 2-year and possibly a 4-year college degree. His faith in Jesus Christ has helped him make positive steps toward being a winner.

---

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

The applicant enlisted on 21 January 1971 with parental permission. He had a ninth grade education and he was 17 years and 2 months old. He completed training and was stationed in Germany as a light truck driver. On 5 November 1971 he reenlisted for 3 years and was advanced to pay grade E-4 on 4 December 1971. He reported to Vietnam on 5 March 1972.

The applicant was referred for psychiatric evaluation because of his "increased difficulty adjusting to the unit." The psychiatrist noted that the applicant admitted two previous NJPs. The 10 April 1972 examination produced a diagnosis of chronic immature personality, manifested by poor impulse control, resentment of authority and deficient motivation. He was found to have no psychiatric disease or defect warranting disposition through medical channels. He met retention standards. The doctor also found him mentally responsible, able to distinguish right from wrong and to adhere to the right. He had the mental capacity to participate in board proceedings. The diagnosis constituted a character and behavior disorder within the meaning of the medical, disability and separation regulations. Separation for unsuitability was recommended.

On 11 April 1972, the applicant consulted with counsel and waived his rights to have his case considered by a board of officers, to appear before such board, to be represented by counsel and to submit statements in his own behalf. He stated that he understood that he might encounter substantial prejudice in civilian life because of the general discharge he might receive.

0n 30 April 1972, his company commander recommended that the applicant be separated with a general discharge. An accompanying record of counseling shows that the applicant was counseled about his conduct and performance on five separate occasions.

The separation authority approved the recommendation and directed that the applicant be separated with a general discharge. On 18 May 1972, he was discharged for unsuitability under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-212.

Army Regulation 635-212, then in effect, set forth the policy and procedures for the administrative separation of enlisted personnel for unfitness and unsuitability. It provided, in pertinent part, for the discharge due to unsuitability of those individuals with character and behavior disorders and disorders of intelligence as determined by medical authority. When separation for unsuitability was warranted an honorable or general discharge was issued as determined by the separation authority based upon the individual's entire record.

---

Army Regulation 635-200, at chapter 3 outlines the criteria for characterization of service. An HD is a separation with honor. The honorable characterization of service is appropriate when the quality of the soldier’s service generally has met the standards of acceptable conduct and performance of duty.

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. Notwithstanding the applicant's youth, immaturity, background, family problems or psychiatric diagnosis, he had demonstrated the capacity for honorable service by the completion of training, early promotion and approximately a year of service without a discreditable incident of record.

2. By his own admission he reenlisted in order to obtain a bonus and to serve in Vietnam. Once there, however, rather than contributing to the solution, he chose to drink and drug and to let his performance and behavior become a problem. He did not generally meet the standards of acceptable conduct and performance of duty expected of a soldier.

3. 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.

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

__JNS___ __WDP__ __DPH__ DENY APPLICATION

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

---

INDEX

CASE ID	AR
SUFFIX
RECON
DATE BOARDED	20020912
TYPE OF DISCHARGE	GD
DATE OF DISCHARGE	19720518
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY	AR635-212 . . . . .
DISCHARGE REASON
BOARD DECISION	DENY
REVIEW AUTHORITY
ISSUES 1.	A93.01
2.	A93.07
3.	A
4.
5.
6.