MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:      

	BOARD DATE:            6 September 2001                    
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR2001058529

	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. Beverly A. Young		Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Mr. Luther L. Santiful		Chairperson	
	Mr. Melvin H. Meyer		Member	
	Mr. John T. Meixell		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 under other than honorable conditions (UOTHC) discharge be upgraded to a general (under honorable conditions) or an honorable discharge.

APPLICANT STATES:  That he was married with a three-month old baby when he was drafted.  He also states that he was very unhappy, was concerned about his wife and child, and was absent without leave (AWOL) to take care of them financially.  He now realizes that he should not have done this and that he should have used better judgement.  He further states that he is now self-employed, a responsible citizen and a grandfather, and was previously a plant superintendent. In support of his application, he submitted a copy of his DD Form 214 (Armed Forces of the United States Report of Transfer or Discharge).

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

The applicant was inducted in the Army on 22 March 1971 and was assigned to Fort Jackson, South Carolina, for basic combat training.  On 30 March 1971, the applicant was AWOL from his basic training unit and was dropped from the unit rolls on 28 April 1971.  He was apprehended by civilian authorities, transferred to the county jail, and returned to military control on 31 May 1971.

Records show the applicant was AWOL again on 1 June 1971 and returned to military control on 21 January 1972.  

On 22 January 1972, charges were preferred against the applicant for being AWOL from 30 March 1971 to 21 January 1972.

On 24 January 1972, the applicant consulted with legal counsel and voluntarily requested discharge for the good of the service in lieu of trial by court-martial under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 10.  In doing so, he admitted guilt to the offenses charged and acknowledged that he might encounter substantial prejudice in civilian life and that he might be ineligible for many or all benefits administered by the Veterans Administration if an undesirable discharge were issued.  The applicant did not submit a statement in his own behalf.  

On 29 January 1972, the separation authority approved the applicant’s request for discharge and directed issuance of an undesirable discharge.  

The applicant was discharged on 9 February 1972 under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 10, for the good of the service in lieu of trial by court-martial.  He had 1 month and 27 days of creditable service and 294 days of lost time due to AWOL.

Prior to his discharge, the applicant underwent a separation medical examination and was found fit for separation with a physical profile of 111111.

There is no indication that the applicant applied to the Army Discharge Review Board within its 15-year statute of limitations.

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.  A discharge under other than honorable conditions is normally considered appropriate.  However, 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.  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.  

2.  There is no indication of procedural errors which would tend to jeopardize his rights or that his request for a chapter 10 discharge was made under coercion or duress.

3.  The Board considered the applicant’s contention that he was AWOL so he could take care of his family.  However, this issue is not sufficiently mitigating to warrant an upgrade of his discharge.

4.  Therefore, the type of discharge directed and the reason for his separation were appropriate considering all the facts of the case.

5.  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.

6.  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

LLS_____  JTM_____  MHM____  DENY APPLICATION

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

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2001058529	
SUFFIX		
RECON	YYYYMMDD	
DATE BOARDED	20010906	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE	UOTHC	
DATE OF DISCHARGE	19720209	
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY	AR635-200,chapter 10	
DISCHARGE REASON	For the Good of the Service	
BOARD DECISION	DENY	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.	144.0000	
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.