MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:     

	BOARD DATE:           3 June 2003                    
	DOCKET NUMBER:  AR2003085478

	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. William Blakely		Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Ms. Joann H. Langston		Chairperson	
	Ms. Jennifer L. Prater		Member	
	Mr. Paul M. Smith		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 undesirable discharge (UD) be upgraded to either a general, under honorable conditions discharge (GD) or an honorable discharge (HD).  

APPLICANT STATES:  In effect, that the overall quality of his service was not considered in determining the type of discharge he would receive as a result of his voluntarily requesting to be discharged for the good of the service/in lieu of trial by court-martial.  In support of his application, he submits a copy of his separation document (DD Form 214).

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

On 11 July 1969, the applicant was inducted into the Army for two years.  He successfully completed training and was awarded military occupational specialty (MOS) 51N (Water Supply Specialist).  His record documents no acts or valor, significant achievement, or service warranting special recognition, and it confirms that the highest rank he attained while serving on active duty was private first class/E-3 (PFC/E-3).

The applicant’s record also shows that he twice went absent without leave (AWOL) from his unit.  His first period of AWOL was from 1 March to 13 April 1970, and his second period was from 22 September to 23 September 1970.  On 15 November 1970, he went AWOL a third time, and he remained away until returning to military control on 22 February 1971. 

A court-martial charge was preferred against the applicant for his AWOL period from 15 November 1970 to 22 February 1971.  On 3 March 1971, the applicant consulted with legal counsel, and after being advised of the basis for the contemplated trial by court-martial and the effects of an UD, he voluntarily requested to be discharged for the good of the service, in lieu of trial by 
court-martial, under the provisions of chapter 10, Army Regulation 635-200.

On 25 March 1971, the appropriate authority approved the applicant’s request for discharge, and he directed that the applicant receive an UD and be reduced to the lowest enlisted grade.  On 2 April 1971, the applicant was discharged accordingly.  At the time of his discharge, he had completed a total of 1 year, 
3 months, and 26 days of active military service and he had accrued 146 days of lost time due to AWOL.

There is no evidence that the applicant applied to the Army Discharge Review Board for upgrade of his discharge within its 15-year statue 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 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. However, at the time of the applicant's separation the regulation provided for the issuance of an undesirable discharge.

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 Board notes the applicant’s contention that his discharge should be upgraded based on his overall record of service.  However, it finds an insufficient evidentiary basis to support the requested relief. 

2.  The evidence of record confirms that the applicant was charged with the commission of an offense punishable under the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) with a punitive discharge.  The Board notes that, after consulting with defense counsel, the applicant voluntarily requested separation from the Army in lieu of trial by court-martial.  In doing so, he admitted guilt to the stipulated offense under the UCMJ.  

3.  The Board is satisfied that all requirements of law and regulation were met and the rights of the applicant were fully protected throughout the separation process, and that the applicant’s overall record of service was not sufficiently meritorious to warrant an upgrade of his discharge at this time. 

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

__JHL  _JLP_  __PMS _  DENY APPLICATION

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

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2003085478	
SUFFIX		
RECON		
DATE BOARDED		
TYPE OF DISCHARGE	UOTHC	
DATE OF DISCHARGE	19710402	
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY	AR 635-200.  .  .  .  .  	
DISCHARGE REASON	In Lieu of Trial CM	
BOARD DECISION	DENY	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1. 708	144.7000	
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.