MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:   

	BOARD DATE:           23 August 2001                   
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR2001056966

	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	
	Mrs. Nancy Amos		Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Mr. John H. Kern		Chairperson	
	Mr. Thomas Lanyi		Member	
	Ms. Paula Mokulis		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. 

APPLICANT STATES:  That while in basic training he made a serious and foolish mistake and went absent without leave (AWOL).  After three months he turned himself in.  He was asked if he wanted to stay in the Army or be discharged.  He was immature at the time and decided he wanted to be discharged.  He provides his Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty, DD Form 214, as supporting evidence.

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

He was born on 11 February 1963.  He enlisted in the U. S. Army Reserve (USAR) on 24 March 1982.  He was ordered to initial active duty for training and completed basic training and advanced individual training and was awarded military occupational specialty 51R (Interior Electrician).  He was discharged on   23 August 1982 for the purpose of enlisting in the USAR Delayed Entry Program. He enlisted in the Regular Army on 9 November 1982.

On 1 March 1983, court-martial charges were preferred against the applicant charging him with being AWOL from 24 November 1982 to on or about 1 March 1983.

On or about 4 March 1983, after consulting with legal counsel, the applicant voluntarily requested a discharge under the provisions of Army Regulation     635-200, chapter 10 for the good of the service in lieu of trial by court-martial.  The applicant was advised of the effects of a discharge under other than honorable conditions and that he might be deprived of many or all Army and Veterans Administration benefits.  He submitted no statement in his own behalf. 

On 24 March 1983, the appropriate authority approved the applicant’s request and directed he receive a discharge UOTHC.

On 15 April 1983, the applicant was discharged, in pay grade E-1, under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 10, for the good of the service with a discharge UOTHC.  He had completed 2 months and 2 days of creditable active service for that period and had 97 days of lost time.

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.  The request may be submitted at any time after charges have been preferred and must include the individual’s admission of guilt.  A discharge under other than honorable conditions is 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.  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’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.  He was advised at the time of the effects of a discharge under other than honorable conditions.

3.  The Board notes the applicant’s age at the time he departed AWOL.  However, he had completed basic training and advanced individual training and so was aware of the standards of conduct required by the Army.  The Board is also cognizant that thousands of soldiers his age or younger successfully complete their terms of service.  Considering the circumstances of his case, it would not be equitable to grant him the benefits of an upgraded discharge.  

4.  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

__jhk___  __tl____  __pm____  DENY APPLICATION

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

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2001056966	
SUFFIX		
RECON		
DATE BOARDED	20010823	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE	UOTHC	
DATE OF DISCHARGE	19830415	
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY	AR 635-200, ch 10	
DISCHARGE REASON	A70.00	
BOARD DECISION	(DENY)	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.	110.00	
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.