PROCEEDINGS

	IN THE CASE OF:  

	BOARD DATE:           25 September 2003
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR2003084619

	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	
	Mr. Paul Wright		Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Mr. John N. Slone		Chairperson	
	Ms. Linda D. Simmons		Member	
	Ms. Regan K. Smith		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)

FINDINGS:

1.  The applicant has exhausted or the Board has waived the requirement for exhaustion of all administrative remedies afforded by existing law or regulations.

2.  The applicant requests an upgrade of his under other than honorable conditions (UOTHC) discharge.

3.  The applicant states that, although it has been more than 15 years since his discharge, the Board should review his case because of the extraordinary circumstances surrounding it.  In December 1981, his father died unexpectedly while on active duty in the US Navy at the Massachusetts Maritime Academy, leaving his mother extremely distraught and forced to raise five young children alone.  The applicant sought a compassionate reassignment to Fort Devens, Massachusetts, in order to be near his mother and help support her and his siblings.  Unfortunately, his unit was preparing for Operation Gallant Eagle '82 and was not interested in processing personnel requests for compassionate reassignments.  On 30 March 1982, 1,780 US Army paratroopers jumped into five drop zones at the National Training Center, Ft Irwin, California.  Despite high winds, the jump was not cancelled resulting in 158 injuries and 6 deaths.  This situation added to his mother's anguish and resulted in the applicant's absence without leave (AWOL) in April 1982 after trying unsuccessfully for 5 months to obtain a compassionate reassignment.  He goes on to state that he made some very rash choices then - his mother's deteriorating mental and physical health, his youth and inexperience, and his chain-of-command's apparent indifference to his world falling apart all culminated in his very poor decision to go AWOL.  He asks the Board to consider all of these factors and grant him an upgrade.

4.  The applicant’s military records show that he was born on 3 March 1960 and enlisted in the Regular Army on 28 January 1981 for 4 years.  He successfully completed One-Station Unit Training (OSUT) and was awarded military occupational specialty (MOS) 11B10, Rifleman.  He went on to Basic Airborne Training and, upon completion, was assigned to Company B, 2nd Battalion (Airborne), 325th Infantry, 82nd Airborne Division at Fort Bragg, North Carolina, with duty as an automatic rifleman.

5.  On 31 March 1981 (while in OSUT), the applicant accepted NJP (nonjudicial punishment) under the provisions of Article 15, Uniform Code of Military Justice, for being drunk and disorderly on 29 March 1981.  Punishment was reduction to E-1.

6.  On 30 July 1982, the applicant was confined at the Personnel Control Facility at Fort Dix, New Jersey, after being apprehended for being AWOL.  On an interview sheet, he stated his reason for going AWOL was his father's death and his mother and five siblings needed him to be closer to home.  He indicated that he tried to get a compassionate reassignment, but received no support from his chain of command.  He had obtained all the necessary documentation, but his request never made it to the Personnel Administration Center (PAC).  He said he saw AWOL as the only alternative because things were getting worse at home.  On 2 August 1982, a staff member at the Personnel Control Facility called the PAC at Fort Bragg and confirmed that the compassionate reassignment had never been received from the unit.  There is a footnote that the applicant's commander still had the paperwork in April 1982.  The applicant had submitted the necessary paperwork to his command in February 1982.

7.  On 2 August 1982, court-martial charges were filed against the applicant for being AWOL from 3 May through 29 July 1982.

8.  On 2 August 1982, after consulting with counsel, the applicant requested separation under the provision of chapter 10, Army Regulation 635-200.  He declined to submit a statement in his behalf.  

9.  On 10 August 1982, the commander and intermediate commander both recommended approval with the issuance of a UOTHC discharge.

10.  On 16 August 1982, the general court-martial convening authority approved the request and directed a UOTHC discharge.

11.  On 31 August 1982, the applicant was separated with a UOTHC discharge.  He had 1 year, 8 months, and 7 days of active Federal service and 86 days of lost time.  Additionally, he had awards of the Army Service Ribbon, Parachute Badge, Expert Badge (Hand Grenade), and Marksman Badge (M-16 Rifle).

12.  On 3 May 1996, the Army Discharge Review Board (ADRB) denied the applicant's request for an upgrade of his discharge.  Attachments to his appeal to the ADRB contain several letters showing excellent post-service conduct.

13.  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.

CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant's father died while serving on active duty in the Navy.  The applicant's mother, who was grieving the loss of her husband, was left to provide for herself and five minor children.  As the oldest child in the family, the applicant sought a compassionate reassignment from Fort Bragg to Fort Devens in order to be near his family during the difficult period immediately following his father's death.  He assembled the necessary documentation and submitted his request in December 1981.  Unfortunately, military operational requirements did not permit the timely processing of the request.  When he departed his unit in an AWOL status on 3 May 1982, all efforts to process the compassionate reassignment request apparently, and appropriately, ceased.

2.  The Board does not excuse or condone the applicant's AWOL; however, his extreme personal situation, compounded by his command's tardiness in processing his request for a compassionate reassignment, mitigates the seriousness of the offense.  The Board notes the applicant submitted all the paperwork required by the Army to obtain a compassionate reassignment.  His unit failed to take any action on his request as they were required to do.  With a recently deceased father and a distraught mother and five siblings at home, the pressure on the applicant, the oldest son, to be near his family was enormous.  After more than 4 months without any apparent action on his request, he made a poor decision and went AWOL to take care of his family.

3.  The Board notes that the applicant has made a successful transition to civilian life as evidenced by the enclosures to his ADRB application.  Normally, this alone would not be a sufficient basis for an upgrade of a discharge.  But this, combined with the personal situation recounted above, leads the Board to conclude that the characterization of his discharge is too harsh.

4.  In view of the foregoing findings and conclusions, and in the interest of justice and equity, it would be appropriate to correct the applicant’s records as indicated below.

RECOMMENDATION:

That all of the Department of the Army records related to this case be corrected by changing the characterization of the discharge of the individual concerned to General Under Honorable Conditions with no change in the reason and authority.

BOARD VOTE:  

__jns___  __lds___  __rks___  GRANT AS STATED IN RECOMMENDATION

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

________  ________  ________  DENY APPLICATION

			John N. Slone
		______________________
		        CHAIRPERSON

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2003084619	
SUFFIX		
RECON		
DATE BOARDED	20030925	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE	UOTHC	
DATE OF DISCHARGE	19820831	
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY	AR 635-200, Chap 10	
DISCHARGE REASON	A70.00	
BOARD DECISION	(GRANT)	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.	144.7000	
2.	144.7100	
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.