MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:       

	BOARD DATE:           18 September 2001
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR2001055265

	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. Robert J. McGowan		Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Ms. JoAnn H. Langston		Chairperson	
	Mr. Melvin H. Meyer		Member	
	Ms. Karen A. Heinz		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 be changed.

APPLICANT STATES:  That at the time of his discharge, he was young and scared and did not know what was happening; that he needed advice and did not get it; and that he had no idea his future would be so affected by his discharge.

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

He was born on 19 August 1953 and enlisted in the Regular Army at Van Nuys, California for a period of 2 years on 31 August 1971.  He was then honorably discharged on 23 September 1971 in order to reenlist immediately for 3 years on 24 September 1971.

Following basic combat training at Fort Ord, California, he was assigned to Fort Sill, Oklahoma for advanced individual training (AIT) in military occupational specialty (MOS) 13A, Cannoneer.  While still in AIT, the applicant went AWOL (absent without leave) from 14-28 January 1972.  Upon his return to military control at Fort Sill, he accepted nonjudicial punishment (NJP) under Article 15, Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ), for AWOL, disobeying a lawful order, and breaking restriction.  He was punished by reduction to private/E-1, forfeiture of $100 pay per month for 2 months, and 30 days' restriction and extra duty.

On 2 February 1972, the applicant again went AWOL and remained absent until 3 April 1972 when he returned to military control at Fort Ord.  He was assigned to the Fort Ord Personnel Control Facility and court-martial charges were preferred against him for being AWOL.  On 10 April 1972, he consulted with counsel and voluntarily requested discharge for the good of the service under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 10, in lieu of trial by court-martial.  He stated that he acknowledged he was guilty of the charge against him, a charge which authorized the imposition of a bad conduct or dishonorable discharge.  He further stated that he understood that he may be discharged under other than honorable conditions and furnished with an Undesirable Discharge Certificate and that as a result, he may be ineligible for many or all benefits administered by the Veterans Administration (VA) and under State and Federal law.  He submitted a statement in his own behalf, stating "I want out.  I can't stand it.  I don't like the people in the Army.  I'll split again and never come back.  So, save everybody some trouble and let me out."

The applicant's request for discharge in lieu of trial by court-martial was approved on 11 May 1972.  On 15 May 1972, he was separated with an Undesirable Discharge.  He had 5 months and 6 days of creditable service on his enlistment and 6 months of total creditable service.  He also had 76 days of lost time due to AWOL.

The applicant petitioned the Army Discharge Review Board (ADRB) seeking a discharge upgrade.  The ADRB, after considering his case on 18 January 1984, denied his request.

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.  Army policy states that although an honorable or general discharge is authorized, a discharge under other than honorable conditions is normally considered appropriate.  At the time of the applicant’s separation, the regulation provided for the issuance of an Undesirable Discharge.

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 applicant was 18 years old when he first enlisted and met all entrance qualification standards, to include age.  There is no evidence that the applicant was any less mature than other soldiers of the same age who successfully completed military service.

3.  The applicant was charged with the commission of an offense punishable under the UCMJ with a punitive discharge.  The Board noted that the applicant consulted with legal counsel who thoroughly explained his situation and the effects of a less than fully honorable discharge.  Having been so informed, the applicant voluntarily, and in writing, requested separation from the Army in lieu of trial by court-martial.  In doing so, he admitted guilt to the stipulated offense.

4. The applicant's voluntary request for separation under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 10, for the good of the service, 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.  There is no error or injustice.

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

__JHL __  ___MHM_  __KAH __  DENY APPLICATION

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

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2001055265	
SUFFIX		
RECON		
DATE BOARDED	20010918	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE	UD	
DATE OF DISCHARGE	19720515	
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY	AR 635-200 C10	
DISCHARGE REASON	A71.00	
BOARD DECISION	DENY	
REVIEW AUTHORITY	DIRECTOR	
ISSUES         1.	110.0000	
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.