MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

		IN THE CASE OF

		BOARD DATE:           November 20, 2003                   
		DOCKET NUMBER:   AR2003091097

	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. Yvonne J. Foskey		Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Mr. Robert L. Duecaster		Chairperson	
	Ms. Joann H. Langston		Member	
	Ms. Linda D. Simmons		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 an honorable discharge (HD).

APPLICANT STATES:  In effect, that he was a young and confused seventeen year old boy when he was talked into joining the military by his father.  He states that he should never have been in the military and entered against his will.  Therefore, he contends that it would be appropriate for him to receive an HD.  In support of his application, he submits a copy of his resume and a copy of his separation document (DD Form 214). 

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

On 11 January 1968, he enlisted in the Army at the age of seventeen.  His Enlisted Qualification Record (DA Form 20) shows that he successfully completed basic training at Fort Jackson, South Carolina.  Upon completion of basic training, the applicant was assigned to Fort Gordon, Georgia to attend advanced individual training (AIT) in military occupational specialty (MOS) 
31E (Field Radio Repairman).

On 30 March 1968, while attending AIT, the applicant departed absent without leave (AWOL) from his unit at Fort Gordon.  He remained away for 24 days until returning to military control on 22 April 1968.  On 27 April 1968, he accepted nonjudicial punishment (NJP) for this offense.  

On 7 August 1968, the applicant again departed AWOL from his Fort Gordon AIT unit.  He remained away for 98 days until returning to military control at Fort Dix, New Jersey on 12 November 1968.  On 22 November 1968, he was found guilty of being AWOL by a SPCM.  

On 30 November 1968, the applicant began training in MOS 63B (Wheel Vehicle Mechanic) at Fort Dix.  He successfully completed AIT, was awarded MOS 63B, and he was assigned to Fort Stewart, Georgia.  

On 2 June 1969, the applicant departed AWOL from his unit at Fort Stewart.  He remained away for 91 days until returning to military control on 9 September 1969.  

On 2 October 1969, the applicant was found guilty by a special court-martial (SPCM) of being AWOL from on or about 2 June 1969 to on or about 
10 September 1969.  The resultant sentence included forfeiture of $82.00 per month for four months, confinement at hard labor for four months, and reduction of grade to private/E-1 (PV1).  

The facts and circumstances surrounding the applicant’s discharge processing are not in the record.  However, there is a separation document (DD Form 214) on file that confirms that on 31 August 1970, he received an UD under the provisions of chapter 10, Army Regulation 635-200, in lieu of trial by 
court-martial.  The separation document also verifies that at the time of his discharge, he had completed 1 year and 21 days of creditable active military service, and he had accrued 575 days of time lost.  This document also confirms that his last period of documented time lost was from 12 December 1969 through 30 August 1970.  

There is no indication that the applicant requested an upgrade of his discharge from the Army Discharge Review Board within its 15 year stature 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 discharge, issuance of an UD was authorized 

DISCUSSION:  Considering all the evidence, allegations, and information presented by the applicant, together with the evidence of record, applicable law and regulations, and advisory opinion(s), it is concluded:

1.  The applicant’s claim that his discharge should be upgraded because he was talked into joining the military at a young age by his father and not of his own free will was carefully considered.  However, this factor was not considered to be sufficiently mitigating to warrant the requested relief. 

2.  The applicant’s record is void of facts and circumstances concerning the events that led to a discharge from the Army.  However, the record does include a properly constituted DD Form 214 that was authenticated by the applicant with his signature.  This document identifies the reason and characterization of the discharge and government regularity in the discharge process is presumed.  

3.  The evidence of record shows the applicant was discharged under the provisions of Chapter 10, AR 635-200, in lieu of trial by court-martial.  In connection with such a discharge, he was charged with the commission of an offense punishable under the UCMJ with a punitive discharge.  Procedurally, he was required to consult with defense counsel, and to voluntarily request separation from the Army in lieu of trial by court-martial.  In doing so, he would have admitted guilt to the stipulated offense under the UCMJ. 

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_  _LDS___  __RLD__       DENY APPLICATION

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

INDEX

CASE ID	AR200309197	
SUFFIX		
RECON		
DATE BOARDED	2003/11	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE	HD	
DATE OF DISCHARGE	1970/08/31	
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY	AR 635-200 chapter 10	
DISCHARGE REASON	In lieu of court-martial	
BOARD DECISION	DENY	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.		
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.