MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:       

	BOARD DATE:           15 November 2001 
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR2001059683

	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. Carolyn G. Wade		Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Ms. Irene N. Wheelwright		Chairperson	
	Mr. Stanley Kelley		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 undesirable discharge be upgraded to honorable.

APPLICANT STATES:  That he was in a lot of pain from a serious car accident that occurred prior to his joining the Army.  Because of that pain, he was unable to do all the things required of him physically and mentally.  He also states that he wishes he could have conformed to military life and made it a career like other family members did.  Lastly, he states that he wants his discharge upgraded so he can die knowing he served honorably.

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

He enlisted in the Regular Army on 17 May 1971 for a period of 3 years.  He enlisted for the United States Army Station of Choice Enlistment Option (Europe) and the Training of Choice Enlistment Option (Career Group 11, Infantry).  The applicant’s Report of Medical Examination and Report of Medical History found him fit and qualified for enlistment and he was assigned to Fort Jackson, South Carolina for basic combat training (BCT).  Following completion of BCT, the applicant was assigned to Fort Polk, Louisiana for advanced individual training (AIT).

On 21 August 1971, prior to completing AIT, the applicant departed his unit in an absent without leave (AWOL) status.  On 19 September 1971, he was dropped from the rolls.  On 27 September 1971, the applicant surrendered to military authorities at Fort Bragg, North Carolina and was assigned to the Personnel Control Facility.

On 16 October 1971, the applicant departed his unit in an AWOL status and remained absent until 23 November 1971.  On 24 November 1971, the applicant was placed in pretrial confinement in the post stockade.

On 29 November 1971, court-martial charges were preferred.  The applicant was charged with two specifications of AWOL totaling 75 days.

On 7 December 1971, after consulting with legal counsel regarding his rights, the applicant voluntarily and in writing requested discharge under the provisions of chapter 10, Army Regulation 635-200.  He did not submit a statement in his own behalf.  The company and intermediate commanders recommended that the applicant’s request for discharge be approved with a UD.

On 31 January 1972, the appropriate authority approved the applicant’s request for discharge from the Army with a UD.  Accordingly, on 7 February 1972, the applicant was discharged from the Army after completing 6 months and 5 days of creditable military service and accruing 75 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.  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 a UD.

There is no evidence of record that the applicant applied to the Army Discharge Review Board (ADRB) within its 15-year statue of limitations.

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 evidence of record does not support the applicant’s contention that a pre-enlistment automobile accident and the resultant pain prevented him from doing all of the things required of him physically and mentally, nor has he provided any collaborating evidence to support it.  The applicant’s Report of Medical Examination (enlistment physical) found him in good health and qualified for enlistment.  The applicant also stated on the Report of Medical History that he was in good health.

2.  The applicant's voluntary request for separation under the provisions of chapter 10, Army Regulation 635-200, 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.

3.  The discharge process was in accordance with law and regulations applicable at the time.  The character of the discharge is commensurate with the applicant's overall record.  Furthermore, the applicant by amassing multiple periods of AWOL knowingly risked a military career and diminished the quality of his service below that meriting a general or fully honorable discharge.

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

__inw___  __sk____  ___kah  __  DENY APPLICATION

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

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2001059683	
SUFFIX		
RECON		
DATE BOARDED	20011115	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE	UD	
DATE OF DISCHARGE	19720207	
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY	AR 635-200, c10	
DISCHARGE REASON	In lieu of trial by court-martial	
BOARD DECISION	DENY	
REVIEW AUTHORITY	Director	
ISSUES         1.	144.9405	
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.