MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:  

	BOARD DATE:  2 July 2002
	DOCKET NUMBER:  AR2002068507

	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. Joyce A. Wright		Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Ms. Karol A. Kennedy		Chairperson	
	Mr. Raymond J. Wagner		Member	
	Mr. Arthur A. Omartian		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 discharge characterized as under other than honorable conditions (UOTHC) be upgraded to honorable.APPLICANT STATES:  That his UOTHC discharge should be upgraded to honorable.  He attended basic training, served overseas, was promoted to pay grade E-4, and received several awards.  He contributed to the defense of his country and was a member of several military groups.  Upon his return to the US, he was assigned to Fort Hood, Texas, where his troubles began.  He was upset and went AWOL with 60 days remaining on his contract.  Since his discharge, he has changed and credits the military with his success.  He submits five character reference letters and a newspaper article in support of his application.EVIDENCE OF RECORD:  The applicant’s military records show he enlisted on 10 March 1981, as a combat engineer.

The applicant was punished twice under Article 15, Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ), for failure to go to his appointed place of duty on two occasions. His punishments consisted of a reduction to the pay grade of E-1, a forfeiture of pay, and confinement at hard labor for 30 days.
He was convicted by a summary court-martial on 9 March 1984, of being AWOL from 7 December 1983 to 11 January 1984.  His sentence consisted of a reduction to the pay grade of E-1, a forfeiture of pay, and confinement at hard labor for 30 days.
The applicant’s records show he was AWOL from 3 to 7 May 1984 and from 16 May to 4 December 1984.

Charges were preferred against the applicant on 18 December 1984, for being AWOL from 16 May to 5 December 1984.

On 18 December 1984, he consulted with 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 acknowledged guilt of the offense charged and acknowledged that he might encounter substantial prejudice in civilian life and might be ineligible for many or all benefits administered by the Veterans Administration (VA) if a discharge under other than honorable conditions were issued.  He also elected not to submit a statement in his own behalf.

On 3 January 1985, the separation authority approved the applicant’s request for discharge and directed that he be furnished an Under Other Than Honorable Conditions Discharge.  The applicant was discharged on 24 January 1985.  

There is no evidence that the applicant applied to the Army Discharge Review Board for an upgrade of his discharge within its 15-year statute of limitations.

Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for 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.

The character reference letters provided by the applicant’s family members attest to his good citizenship and hard work.  Additional references attests to his high values, performance, and independent thinking.  A newspaper article credits the applicant with assisting an injured motorist.

DISCUSSION:  Considering all the evidence, allegations, and information presented by the applicant, together with the evidence of record, applicable law and regulations, and 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.  The type of discharge directed and the reasons for that separation were appropriate considering all of the facts of the case.  

3.  The character references and newspaper article pertaining to his post service conduct is not sufficient evidence to warrant an upgrade of his UOTHC discharge.

4.  The applicant’s contention that he was AWOL only during his last 60 days of service is not supported by the evidence of record.  He was AWOL on three separate occasions, once for 6 months.

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

__kk____  __rw___  ___ao____  DENY APPLICATION

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

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2002068507	
SUFFIX		
RECON		
DATE BOARDED	20020702	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE	UOTHC	
DATE OF DISCHARGE	19850124	
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY	AR 635-200, CHAP 10	
DISCHARGE REASON		
BOARD DECISION	DENY	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.  360		
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.