MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:     

	BOARD DATE:           13 September 2001
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR2001052914

	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. Rosa M. Chandler		Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Mr. Fred N. Eichorn		Chairperson	
	Mr. John E. Denning		Member	
	Ms. Terry L. Placek		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 (UOTHC) be upgraded to a fully honorable discharge. 

APPLICANT STATES:  In effect, that he is requesting that his discharge be upgraded so that he may be able to obtain Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) benefits for a service-connected disability.

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

That on 8 January 1985, he voluntarily enlisted in the United States Army Reserve (USAR) for a period of 8 years and training in military occupational specialty (MOS) 52G (Transmission and Distribution Specialist).  

On 31 January 1985, the applicant was ordered to active duty for training.  On 5 February 1985, he reported to Fort Leonard Wood, Missouri for basic training.  He completed basic training and, on 6 April 1985, he was assigned to Fort Sill, Oklahoma for advanced individual training.  On 6 June 1985, he departed his unit at Fort Sill in an absent without leave (AWOL) status and he remained AWOL until he returned to military control at the Personnel Control Facility (PCF), Fort Hood, Texas on 20 August 1985. He was returned to Fort Sill on 22 August 1985 and assigned to that installation's PCF.  He never completed the requirements for award of MOS 52G.

The applicant's records do not contain all of the facts and circumstances surrounding the discharge process.  However, an undated DA Form 
2496 (Disposition Form) shows that the applicant was charged with being AWOL from 6 June-20 August 1985.  He consulted with legal counsel and requested discharge for the good of the service in lieu of trial by court-martial under the provisions of chapter 10, Army Regulation 635-200.  He was advised that he could receive a UOTHC discharge.  He authenticated a statement with his own signature in which he acknowledged that he understood the ramifications of a chapter 
10 separation and the effects of receiving a UOTHC discharge.  He did not submit a statement in his own behalf. 

On 26 August 1985, the applicant was voluntarily placed on excess leave pending discharge under the provisions of chapter 10, Army Regulation 635-200.  His records contain a properly constituted DD Form 214 which shows he was discharged under the provisions of chapter 10, Army Regulation 635-200, for the good of the service in lieu of trial by court-martial with a UOTHC on 18 January 1985.  It also shows that he completed 6 months and 4 days of active military service and had 73 days of lost time.  

The applicant petitioned the Army Discharge Review Board (ADRB) seeking a discharge upgrade.  On 17 January 2001, the ADRB notified the applicant that his application was not filed within that board's 15-year statute of limitations and would not be considered.

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 submit a request for discharge for the good of the service in lieu of trial by court-martial.  The request may be submitted at any time after charges have been preferred and must include the individual’s admission of guilt.  Although, an honorable or general discharge was authorized, a UOTHC discharge was then 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.  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.

2.  The available records show that the applicant committed an AWOL offense at Fort Sill which was punishable under the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) with a punitive discharge.  He consulted with legal counsel and was informed that he could receive a UOTHC discharge.  He was also informed of the consequences of receiving such a discharge.  He voluntarily requested separation under the provisions of Army of chapter 10, Army Regulation 635-200, for the good of the service, to avoid trial by court-martial.  In doing so, he admitted guilt to the stipulated offense under the UCMJ.  There is no evidence in the record, nor has the applicant presented any, to indicate that the request was made under coercion or duress; therefore, the Board presumes regularity in the discharge process.

3.  The applicant's conduct was inconsistent with the Army’s standards for acceptable personal conduct and his overall quality of service does not warrant an upgrade of his discharge. 

4.  No medical records were available.  However, the available records contain no evidence that indicates the applicant had a medical condition or injury that rendered him medically unfit and justified physical disability processing.  Eligibility for veteran's benefits (to include VA medical benefits) does not fall within the purview of this Board.  Furthermore, the Board does not grant relief solely for the purpose of gaining VA benefits.

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

_fne ____  __jed____  _slp____  DENY APPLICATION

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

					

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2001052914	
SUFFIX		
RECON		
DATE BOARDED	20010913	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE	(UD)	
DATE OF DISCHARGE	19851018	
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY	AR 635-200, CH10	
DISCHARGE REASON	A71.00	
BOARD DECISION	DENY	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.	144.7100	
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.