MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:       

	BOARD DATE:            13 August 2002
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR2002071586

	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. Jessie B. Strickland		Analyst	

The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Mr. Fred N. Eichorn		Chairperson	
	Mr. Ted S. Kanamine		Member	
	Ms. Lana E. McGlynn		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 discharge under other than honorable conditions be upgraded to a more favorable discharge.

APPLICANT STATES:  In effect, that after the war was over, he thought that his life as he knew it was over because a new and different life had taken over; one of fear, panic, alcohol and loneliness.  At the time, he was married and could not hold a job, be around people, or sleep.  Nothing mattered to him and his wife could not take it anymore and they eventually divorced.  He subsequently moved from Tennessee back to his home in Washington where he received treatment from the Department of Veterans Affairs which has helped him to get back to leading a normal life.  He further states that he was not thinking clearly at the time and was not given mental health care.  He also states that he is now employed at a church and school and leads a productive life that benefits himself as well as the community.  In support of his application, he submits nine third party letters of support and a Washington State Police Report showing that he has no record.

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

He initially served on active duty in the Regular Air Force as an aircraft armament systems specialist from 9 November 1977 until he was honorably released from active duty on 8 March 1979 and was transferred to the Washington State Air National Guard (WAANG).  He remained in the WAANG until he was honorably discharged on 31 May 1984.

He enlisted in the Regular Army on 10 August 1988 at the age of 27, for a period of 4 years, training as a heavy wheel vehicle mechanic and assignment to the Continental United States.  At the time of his enlistment he indicated that he was divorced.

He successfully completed his training and was transferred to Fort Stewart, Georgia, on 22 February 1989.  He was advanced to the pay grade of E-4 on 11 June 1989.

He deployed with his unit to Saudi Arabia in support of Operation Desert Storm/Shield from 14 October 1990 until 16 April 1991.

Although the Record of Proceedings of Nonjudicial Punishment (NJP) (DA Form 2627) are not present in the available records, his records do show that NJP was imposed against him on 22 August 1991, for being absent from his place of duty. His punishment consisted of a reduction to the pay grade of E-3 and extra duty. 

He went absent without leave (AWOL) from 7 January 1992 through 4 February 1992 and NJP was imposed against him on 27 February 1992.  His punishment consisted of a reduction to the pay grade of E-2, a forfeiture of pay, extra duty and restriction. 
A local bar to reenlistment was also initiated against him on 17 April 1992, based on his disciplinary record, uttering worthless checks, traffic tickets, failure to follow orders, failure to repair and failure to respond to numerous counseling sessions.  The applicant elected not to submit matters in his own behalf and the battalion commander approved the bar.

The applicant again went AWOL on 27 April 1992 and remained absent until he was apprehended by civil authorities at Vicksburg, Tennessee, on 15 October 1992.  He was returned to military control at Fort Knox, Kentucky, where charges were preferred against him on 21 October 1992.

On 21 October 1992, after consulting with counsel, the applicant submitted a request for discharge for the good of the service under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 10, in lieu of trial by court-martial.  In his request, he indicated that he was making the request of his own free will, without coercion from anyone and that he was aware of the implications attached to his request.  He also admitted that he was guilty of the charges against him or of lesser included offenses which authorized the imposition of a bad conduct or dishonorable discharge.  He further elected not to submit a statement in his own behalf and declined a separation medical examination.

The appropriate authority approved his request on 13 November 1992 and directed that he be discharged under other than honorable conditions.

Accordingly, he was discharged under other than honorable conditions on 7 December 1992, under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 10, in lieu of trial by court-martial.  He had served 3 years, 9 months, and 12 days of active service during his enlistment and had 200 days of lost time due to AWOL.

He applied to the Army Discharge Review Board (ADRB) for an upgrade of his discharge on 28 December 1994 and contended to that board that he had experienced death and destruction during the war and did not receive mental health treatment for the things that bothered him.  The ADRB determined that he had been properly and equitably discharged per his request and voted unanimously to deny his appeal on 26 June 1997.

The letters of support submitted by the applicant with his application all serve to compliment the applicant’s work ethic, integrity and responsibility in his employment.

Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel.  Chapter 10 of the 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 charges have been preferred, submit a request for discharge for the good of the service in lieu of trial by court-martial.  A condition of submitting such a request is that the individual concerned must admit guilt to the charges against them or of a lesser included offense which authorizes the imposition of a bad conduct or dishonorable discharge and they must indicate that they have been briefed and understand the consequences of such a request as well as the discharge they might receive.  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 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.  Accordingly, the type of discharge directed and the reasons therefore were appropriate under the circumstances.

3.  After being afforded the opportunity to assert his innocence before a trial by court-martial, he voluntarily requested a discharge for the good of the service in hopes of avoiding a punitive discharge and having a felony conviction on his records.  In doing so he admitted guilt to the charges against him.  While he may now believe that he made the wrong choice, he should not be allowed to change his mind at this late date, especially considering the number and length of his absences as well as his otherwise undistinguished record of service. 

4.  The Board has noted the applicant’s contentions and supporting documents.  However, they are not sufficiently mitigating to warrant relief when compared to all of the available facts and circumstances in his case.

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

__lem___  ___tsk___  __fe ____  DENY APPLICATION

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

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2002071586	
SUFFIX		
RECON	YYYYMMDD	
DATE BOARDED	2002/08/13	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE	UOTHC	
DATE OF DISCHARGE	1992/12/07	
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY	AR635-200/CH10	
DISCHARGE REASON	GD OF SVC	
BOARD DECISION	DENY	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.  689	144.7000/A70.00	
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.