MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:   

	BOARD DATE:           27 June 2002
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR2002069115

	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. Joyce A. Hall		Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Ms. Irene N. Wheelwright		Chairperson	
	Ms. Kathleen A. Newman		Member	
	Mr. Richard T. Dunbar		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 general discharge (GD) be upgraded to honorable.  (The record of evidence shows that the applicant received an Under Other Than Honorable Conditions (UOTHC) discharge).

APPLICANT STATES:  In effect, that he joined the Army in 1979.  He became a father in November of the same year.  He was sending money home to provide for his daughter, however, it became harder to provide for her because of a build up of other expenses.  In the spring of 1980, he returned home on leave and found his daughter and her mother going through many hardships.  He stayed home longer than he was authorized, which is considered being absent without leave (AWOL).  He did not return to his command because his family needed him at that time.  The military wasn’t paying as much as someone working an eight to five job.  In the fall of 1980, he returned to his command.  He was given the option of an Article 15 or a GD.  He opted for the discharge in order to care for his family.

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

On 13 November 1979, the applicant enlisted in the Regular Army for 4 years.
He completed the required training and was awarded military occupational specialty 13B10 (Cannon Crewman).  Highest pay grade he achieved was pay grade E-2.

On 1 August 1980, the applicant was reported AWOL from B Battery, 1st Battalion, 84th Field Artillery, located at Fort Lewis, Washington.  On 
31 August 1980, the applicant was dropped from the rolls.  On 6 October 
1980, the applicant returned to his command and surrendered to military authority.

On 10 October 1980, court-martial charges were preferred against the applicant for being AWOL from 1 August to 6 October 1980.

On 14 October 1980, the applicant consulted with legal counsel and voluntarily requested a discharge under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 10, for the good of the service in lieu of trial by court-martial.  The applicant was advised of the effects of a discharge under other than honorable conditions and that he might be deprived of many or all Army and Veterans Administration benefits.  He submitted a statement in his behalf.  He was afforded the opportunity to submit statements in his behalf, but declined to do so.

A mental and a physical evaluation found the applicant fit for separation.

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 charges have been preferred and must include the individual’s admission of guilt.  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.  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. 

2.  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.  There is no indication that the request was made under coercion or duress.

3.  The type of discharge directed and the reasons therefore were appropriate considering all the facts of the case.

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

_ _INW_ _  __KAN__  __RTD__  DENY APPLICATION

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

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2002069115	
SUFFIX		
RECON	YYYYMMDD	
DATE BOARDED	2002/06/27	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE	UOTHC	
DATE OF DISCHARGE	1980/10/30	
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY	AR635-200	
DISCHARGE REASON	A70.00	
BOARD DECISION	DENY	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.	144.7000	
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.