MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:   

	BOARD DATE:           4 December 2002
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR2001060613

	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. William Blakely		Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Ms. JoAnn H. Langston		Chairperson	
	Ms. Margaret K. Patterson		Member	
	Mr. Eric N. Andersen		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:  In effect, that his under other than honorable conditions (UOTHC) discharge be upgraded to an honorable discharge (HD). 

APPLICANT STATES: In effect, that his youth and immaturity impaired his ability to serve in the Army.

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

On 14 June 1979, he enlisted in the Regular Army for 3 years.  He successfully completed training and was awarded military occupational specialty (MOS) 
67V (Observation-Scout Helicopter Repairman).  

The applicant’s record documents no acts of valor, significant achievement, or service warranting special recognition and it confirms that highest rank he attained while on active duty was private first class/E-3 (PFC/E-3).  However, it does reveal a disciplinary history that includes his acceptance of nonjudicial punishment (NJP) on the following two occasions for the offenses indicated:
26 December 1979, for being absent without leave (AWOL) from 14 December 1979 to 16 December 1979; and 23 June 1980, for failure to go to his appointed place of duty.

On 1 December 1980, the applicant was declared absent without leave (AWOL) from his unit.  He remained away for 74 days until returning to military control on 12 February 1982.

On 25 February 1981, a court-martial charge was preferred against the applicant for his period of AWOL from 1 December 1980 to 12 February 1981.  After consulting with legal counsel and being advised of the basis for the contemplated trial by court-martial; the maximum allowable punishment; and the possible effects of an UOTHC discharge, the applicant voluntarily requested to be discharged for the good of the service/in lieu of trial by court-martial under the provisions of chapter 10, Army Regulation 635-200.

On 3 March 1981, the appropriate authority approved the applicant’s discharge request and directed that he be separated UOTHC and that he be reduced to the lowest enlisted grade.  

On 24 March 1981, the applicant was discharged accordingly.  At the time of his discharge he had completed 1 year, 6 months, and 25 days of creditable active military service and he had accrued 46 days of time lost due to AWOL and confinement.

There is no evidence that the applicant applied to the Army Discharge Review Board for upgrade of his discharge 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 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 court-martial charges have been preferred.  Although an honorable or general discharge is authorized, 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.  The applicant’s contention that his youth and immaturity impaired his ability to serve in the Army is not supported by the evidence of record, nor has he provided evidence to support these contentions.

2.  The evidence of record shows the applicant was charged with the commission of an offense punishable under the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) with a punitive discharge.  The Board notes that, after consulting with defense counsel, 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 offenses under the UCMJ.  

3.  The Board is satisfied that all requirements of law and regulation were met and the rights of the applicant were fully protected throughout the separation process.  It also notes that the characterization of service for this type of discharge is normally UOTHC and that the applicant was aware of that prior to requesting discharge.  Finally, the Board finds the applicant’s characterization of service was appropriate based on his overall record of service. 

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

__JHL__   _ _MKP__  __ENA__  DENY APPLICATION

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

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2001060613	
SUFFIX		
RECON	YYYYMMDD	
DATE BOARDED	2001/12/04	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE	(UOTHC)	
DATE OF DISCHARGE	19810324	
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY	AR 635-200, Chapter 10 .  .  .  .  .  	
DISCHARGE REASON	In lieu of trial by court-martial	
BOARD DECISION	DENY	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.	110.0000	
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.