MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:       

	BOARD DATE:            10 July 2003
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR2003084518

	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. Deyon D. Battle		Analyst	

The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Mr. Roger W. Able		Chairperson	
	Mr. Larry C. Bergquist		Member	
	Ms. Barbara J. Ellis		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 an honorable discharge.

APPLICANT STATES:  That he made the worst decision of his life when he was discharged and that he has lived in regret and shame ever since that time.  He states that he believes that he has suffered enough for the mistake that he made and that a woman, his future wife and the mother of his children was involved in the incident that lead to his discharge.  He concludes by stating that up to the point of the offense for which he was discharged, his service was exemplary and distinguished.

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

On 7 June 1977, he enlisted in the Army at age 23, for 4 years, in the pay grade of E-1.  He successfully completed his training as a cannon crewman.  

The applicant went absent without leave (AWOL) on 21 October 1978 and he remained absent until he was apprehended by civil authorities and returned to military control on 16 March 1979.  The notice of unauthorized absence indicates that prior to going AWOL, the applicant had an alcohol problem related directly to peer pressure and that he volunteered for self help through the drug and alcohol abuse program and was making outstanding progress.

On 27 March 1979, the applicant was notified that charges were pending against him for being AWOL and after consulting with counsel, he submitted a request for discharge under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 10, for the good of the service, in lieu of trial by court-martial.  At the time that he submitted his request he submitted a statement in his own behalf indicating that he could not cope with the Army and that his inability to cope caused him to begin drinking.  He stated that he was placed in the alcohol and drug program for approximately 6 months and that he believed that he failed a urinalysis test because he just could not cope with military life.  He stated that while he was AWOL he had no drinking problem and under the circumstances he desired to be discharged from the Army.  He concluded his statement by explaining that he could not deal with being separated from his parents, family and friends for long periods of time and that when he went AWOL he met a girl who he hoped to marry and that he could not bear to leave her.

The appropriate authority approved the request for discharge on 9 April 1979.  Accordingly, on 24 April 1979, the applicant was discharged under other than honorable conditions, under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 10, for the good of the service, in lieu of trial by court-martial.  He had completed 1 year, 5 months and 23 days of total active service and he had approximately 146 days of lost time due to AWOL.

There is no evidence of record that shows that the applicant ever applied to the Army Discharge Review Board for an upgrade of his discharge within that board’s 15-year statute of limitations.

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.  The applicant's administrative separation was accomplished in compliance with applicable regulations with no indication of procedural errors, which would tend to jeopardize his rights.

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

3.  The Board has noted the applicant’s contentions.  However, he chose to request an administrative discharge rather than risk the consequences of a 
court-martial.  Although he may now believe that he made the wrong choice, he should not be allowed to change his mind at this late date.

4.  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.

5.  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

__lb ____  ___be___  ___ra ___  DENY APPLICATION

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

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2003084518	
SUFFIX		
RECON		
DATE BOARDED	2003/07/10	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE	UOTHC	
DATE OF DISCHARGE	19790424	
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY	AR 635-200	
DISCHARGE REASON	CHAPTER 10	
BOARD DECISION	DENY	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.  689	144.7000	
2.  708	144.7100	
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.