MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION


         IN THE CASE OF:
        


         BOARD DATE: 26 June 2003
         DOCKET NUMBER: AR2003085489

         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. Jessie B. Strickland		Analyst

The following members, a quorum, were present:

Mr. Walter T. Morrison		Chairperson
Mr. Lester Echols		Member
Mr. Lawrence Foster		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 undesirable discharge be upgraded to a general discharge.

APPLICANT STATES: That he believes that he was exhibiting combat stress, which caused him to exhibit erratic behavior and that he has turned his life around and would like this scar removed from his record.

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

He enlisted in Houston, Texas, on 8 February 1966, for a period of 3 years. He completed his basic combat training at Fort Polk, Louisiana, and was transferred to Fort Hood, Texas, to undergo his advanced individual training (AIT). Upon completion of his AIT he remained at Fort Hood for duty as a light weapons infantryman.

On 9 September 1966, he was convicted by a special court-martial of being absent without leave (AWOL) from 1 August to 25 August 1966. He was sentenced to confinement at hard labor for 3 months, a reduction to the pay grade of E-1 and a forfeiture of pay.

On 15 February 1967, he was transferred to Vietnam for duty as a rifleman. He was advanced to the pay grade of E-3 on 21 February 1967.

On 25 October 1967, nonjudicial punishment (NJP) was imposed against him for being AWOL from 3 August to 18 August 1967. His punishment consisted of a reduction to the pay grade of E-2 and a forfeiture of pay.

On 14 December 1967, he was convicted by a special court-martial of assaulting a Vietnamese civilian with a steel helmet, of being AWOL from 30 October to 31 October 1967 and of being AWOL from 26 November to 6 December 1967. He was sentenced to confinement at hard labor for 6 months and a forfeiture of pay.

He was again convicted by a special court-martial on 30 May 1968, of being absent from his place of duty on 16 May 1968, of two specifications of disobeying lawful orders from a superior commissioned officer, and of assaulting a superior noncommissioned officer (NCO). He was sentenced to confinement at hard labor for 6 months and a forfeiture of pay.

He departed Vietnam on 8 December 1968 and was transferred to Fort Hood, Texas.

On 12 March 1969, NJP was imposed against him for two specifications of failure to go to his place of duty. His punishment consisted of a forfeiture of pay and restriction.
On 26 April 1969, the applicant's commander notified him that he was initiating action to discharge him from the service for unfitness, under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-212. He cited the applicant's frequent involvement in incidents of a discreditable nature with military authorities and his disciplinary record as a basis for his recommendation.

On 29 April 1969, NJP was imposed against him for being disrespectful in language to a superior commissioned officer. His punishment consisted of a forfeiture of pay.

The applicant underwent a psychiatric evaluation on 9 May 1969 and the examining psychiatrist opined that he was seen as a character and behavior disorder with very little impulse control. Respect for authority is a constant problem for him and it was deemed doubtful that any attempts at rehabilitation would meet with any results. The psychiatrist opined that separation under Army Regulation 635-212 was appropriate.

On 17 July 1969, after consulting with counsel, the applicant exercised his rights and elected to appear before a board of officers. However, he went AWOL from 20 July to 22 July 1969 and departed AWOL again on 5 August 1969. As a result, the elimination proceedings were halted.

He returned to military control on 22 August 1969 and elimination proceedings were again initiated.

He again consulted with counsel and on 26 August 1969, he waived all of his rights. He also acknowledged that he understood he could expect to encounter substantial prejudice in civilian life and would lose many or all of his benefits as a veteran under both Federal and State laws.

The appropriate authority (a major general) approved the recommendation for discharge on 28 August 1969 and directed that he be furnished an Undesirable Discharge Certificate.

Accordingly, he was discharged under other than honorable conditions on 12 September 1969, under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-212, for unfitness, due to his frequent involvement in incidents of a discreditable nature with military authorities. He had served 2 years, 6 months and 25 days of total active service and had 362 days of lost time due to AWOL and confinement. He was awarded the Vietnam Service Medal with four bronze service stars, the Combat Infantryman Badge and the Republic of Vietnam Campaign Medal.

He applied to the Army Discharge Review Board (ADRB) for an upgrade of his discharge on 26 June 1972. He contended at that time that most of the allegations against him were lies and that he had reasons for doing the things he actually did. The ADRB determined that he had been properly discharged and denied his application on 8 August 1973.

He again applied to the ADRB on 16 April 1980, contending that he was discriminated against, racially, that he suffered from "shot" nerves and that he did not get paid for the last 3 or 4 months he was in the Army. The ADRB again determined that he was properly and equitably discharged and unanimously denied his application on 30 October 1981.

Army Regulation 635-212, in effect at the time, set forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel. It provided, in pertinent part, that members involved in frequent incidents of a discreditable nature with civil or military authorities were subject to separation for unfitness. 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, applicable law and regulations, it is concluded:

1. The applicant’s administrative discharge under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-212, was accomplished in accordance with applicable regulations with no indication of any violations of the applicant’s rights.

2. Accordingly, the type of discharge directed and the reasons therefore appear to be appropriate considering all of the facts of the case.

3. The Board has noted the applicant's contention that his behavior was the result of "combat stress" and finds it to be without merit. The applicant began his pattern of misconduct prior to going to Vietnam and he was convicted by a special court-martial for going AWOL before he arrived in Vietnam.

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

___lf____ __wtm __ __le_____ DENY APPLICATION

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

---

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2003085489
SUFFIX
RECON	YYYYMMDD
DATE BOARDED	2003/06/26
TYPE OF DISCHARGE	UD
DATE OF DISCHARGE	1969/09/12
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY	AR635-212
DISCHARGE REASON	UNFIT
BOARD DECISION	DENY
REVIEW AUTHORITY
ISSUES 1. 583	144.5000/A51.00
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.