RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS

	IN THE CASE OF:       

	BOARD DATE:            09 MARCH 2004                  
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR2003091498

	I certify that hereinafter is recorded the true and complete record of the proceedings of the Army Board for Correction of Military Records in the case of the above-named individual.  

	Mr. Carl W. S. Chun		Director	
	Ms. Deborah L. Brantley		Senior Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Mr. Samuel A. Crumpler		Chairperson	
	Ms. Shirley L. Powell		Member	
	Ms. Barbara J. Ellis		Member	

	The applicant and counsel if any, did not appear before the Board.

	The Board considered the following evidence:

	Exhibit A - Application for correction of military records.

	Exhibit B - Military Personnel Records (including advisory opinion, if any).

THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE:  

1.  The applicant requests, in effect, that his under other than honorable conditions discharge be upgraded.

2.  The applicant states he was “a young man with foolish pride” and now realizes how foolish he was at the time of his discharge.  He states that if he had to do it all over again he would correct every aspect of his life and as such, is asking forgiveness.  

3.  The applicant provides no evidence in support of his request.

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE: 

1.  Records available to the Board indicate that the applicant entered active duty on 2 August 1974, approximately 2 months shy of his 18th birthday.  His records indicate that he was a high school graduate and had a GT (general technical) aptitude score of 108.

2.  The applicant successfully completed basic combat training, although he was punished under Article 15 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice for leaving his weapon unsecured during field training exercises.  In October 1974, following completion of basic training, the applicant was assigned to Redstone Arsenal, Alabama, for advanced individual training (AIT).  

3.  Between October and November 1974 the applicant accumulated 9 days of AWOL (absent without leave).

4.  At the end of November 1974 the applicant was reassigned to Aberdeen Proving Ground in Maryland for training in a different specialty after not completing his initial training at Redstone Arsenal.

5.  The applicant’s records indicate that he did not return to Redstone Arsenal following Christmas break and was placed in an AWOL status effective 
6 January 1975.  He returned to military control on 31 January 1975 but departed AWOL again on 25 February 1975.  

6.  On 15 March 1975, while the applicant was still in an AWOL status, he was confined by civilian authorities for burglary.  He was convicted by civilian authorities in July 1975 and sentenced to 4 years confinement.  He escaped from civilian confinement on 2 September 1975 and on 19 June 1979 he surrendered to military authorities.  

7.  When charges were preferred for the AWOL period 6 January 1975 to 
30 January 1975 and for the period 25 February 1975 to 18 June 1979, the applicant 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.  His request acknowledged he understood the nature and consequences of the undesirable discharge, which he might receive.  He indicated he understood he could be denied some or all veterans' benefits as a result of his discharge and that he may be deprived of rights and benefits as a veteran under both Federal and State law.  He did not submit any statements on his own behalf.  

8.  The medical history, which he submitted for his medical examination for separation, indicated he suffered from depression and excessive worry.  However, the physician found him qualified for separation with a physical profile of 1 1 1 1 1 1.

9.  A mental health evaluation found the applicant fully alert and oriented, his memory good, and his thought process clear and normal.  It determined the applicant was mentally responsible, able to distinguish right from wrong and to adhere to the right.

10.  He was returned to civilian authorities on 3 July 1979 and was placed in an excess leave status.

11.  The applicant’s request for discharge was approved and on 25 July 1979 he was discharged under other than honorable conditions under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, Chapter 10.  He had 6 months and 5 days of creditable service and more than 1600 days of lost time.

12.  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.  

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant’s contention that he regrets the actions of his youth is understandable, however, the evidence does show that the applicant successfully completed basic combat training, which is an indication that he was capable of honorable service despite his youth.  The fact that he now regrets the events that resulted in his under other than honorable conditions discharge is not sufficient to warrant an upgrade of the character of that discharge.

2.  The applicant has submitted neither probative evidence nor a convincing argument in support of his request.

3.  In order to justify correction of a military record the applicant must show, or it must otherwise satisfactorily appear, that the record is in error or unjust.  The applicant has failed to submit evidence that would satisfy that requirement.

BOARD VOTE:

________  ________  ________  GRANT RELIEF 

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

__SAC __  __SLP __  __BJE __  DENY APPLICATION

BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION:

The evidence presented does not demonstrate the existence of a probable error or injustice.  Therefore, the Board determined that the overall merits of this case are insufficient as a basis for correction of the records of the individual concerned.

		___Samuel A. Crumpler_____
		        CHAIRPERSON

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2003091498	
SUFFIX		
RECON	YYYYMMDD	
DATE BOARDED	20040309	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE	(HD, GD, UOTHC, UD, BCD, DD, UNCHAR)	
DATE OF DISCHARGE	YYYYMMDD	
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY	AR . . . . .  	
DISCHARGE REASON		
BOARD DECISION	DENY	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.	110.00	
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.