MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:     

	BOARD DATE:           30 April 2002                   
	DOCKET NUMBER:  AR2002067460

	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. Lee Cates		Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Mr. Arthur A. Omartian  . 		Chairperson	
	Mr. Hubert O. Fry, Jr.		Member	
	Mr. Thomas E. O'Shaugnessy, Jr.		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 the characterization of his service be upgraded to general, under honorable conditions.

APPLICANT STATES: That when he joined the Army he wanted to be a truck driver.  He had already passed the test and his physical examination when he found out he was color-blind.  He was told to pick another MOS (Military Occupational Specialty).  He picked Heating and Ventilation Specialist (MOS 51J).  Once he arrived at his first duty station, he found out that he hated doing heating and ventilation.  At the same time, his girlfriend told him she was going to have a baby and wanted him out of the Army.  He was only 19 at the time and thought he could just walk away like any other job that you quit.  After he turned himself in, he was offered the opportunity to stay or leave the Army.  He chose to leave.

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

On 14 January 1976, at the age of 19, he enlisted in the Army for the Special Unit Option (1st Infantry Division, Fort Riley, Kansas) and MOS 51J.  He was advanced to pay grade E-2, effective 21 May 1976.

On 12 July 1976, he was issued Nonjudicial Punishment under Article 15, Uniform Code of Military Justice for being absent without leave (AWOL) for the periods 19 through 27 May and 2 through 7 June 1976.  His punishment included a reduction to pay grade E-1 (suspended for 30 days), a forfeiture of $100 ($25 suspended for 30 days) and extra duty for 7 days.

On 4 August 1976, he was reported as being AWOL and on 3 September 1976, he was dropped from the rolls as a deserter.

On 26 September 1976, he was returned to Army control.

On 14 October 1976, a physical examination and a mental status evaluation cleared him for separation under chapter 10, Army Regulation 635-200, for the good of the service to avoid being tried by court-martial.

On 15 November 1976, he was placed on excess leave pending discharge.

Although the administrative separation documentation is not in the available records, evidence shows that court-martial charges were preferred by his commander, that he elected to request discharge under the provisions of chapter 10, Army Regulation 635-200, for the good of the service and to avoid trial by court-martial, and that the appropriate separation authority approved and directed the discharge.

On 30 November 1976, at he age of 20, the applicant was discharged under other than honorable conditions and issued an Undesirable Discharge Certificate. His DD Form 214 (Report of Separation from Active Duty) indicates he had         8 months and 18 days of creditable service and 60 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 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 characterization of the applicant’s discharge is appropriate considering all the facts of the case.  There is no apparent error, injustice, inequity, or change in policy or standards on which to base recharacterization of his discharge from undesirable to general, under honorable conditions.

2.  The applicant’s claim of youth is not sufficiently mitigating in support of his request; he was over 20 years of age at the time of his discharge.

3.  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

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

__aao___  _hof___  _teo____      DENY APPLICATION

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

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2002067460	
SUFFIX		
RECON		
DATE BOARDED	20020430	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE		
DATE OF DISCHARGE		
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY		
DISCHARGE REASON		
BOARD DECISION	DENY	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.	144	
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.