MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:       

	BOARD DATE:            5 February 2002                  
	DOCKET NUMBER:    AR2001062753

	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. Stephanie Thompkins		Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Ms. June Hajjar		Chairperson	
	Ms. Karol A. Kennedy		Member	
	Mr. Roger W. Able		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 (UOTHC) be upgraded to honorable.

APPLICANT STATES:  That he went absent without leave (AWOL) because his mother was ill and he wanted to change his military occupational specialty.  He went back and he was promised a general discharge, but did not receive this type of discharge.  He also states that he did not realize the discharge could be changed.  He submits a copy of his separation document (DD Form 214) in support of his request.

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

He enlisted in the Regular Army, as a private, pay grade E-1, on 31 July 1975.

He was advanced to pay grade E-2 on 30 November 1975.

He was reported AWOL on 16 March 1976 and dropped from the rolls of the Army on 14 April 1976.

On 28 April 1976, a commander’s inquiry was held concerning the AWOL.  His commander stated in the inquiry that he believed the applicant did not return because of personal problems at home and had inquired several times into how he could get a compassionate reassignment because of the poor health of his mother.  The commander’s inquiry found no reason to justify his absence other than the applicant’s personal problems at home and the fact he did not like Germany.

On 3 September 1976, he was apprended by civilian authorities and returned to military control.

The facts and circumstances pertaining to the applicant's discharge are not on file.  The applicant’s DD Form 214 indicates that he was discharged on 7 October 1976, under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 10, in pay grade E-1, and was issued a UOTHC discharge certificate. 

There is no evidence that the applicant applied to the Army Discharge Review Board within its 15-year statute of limitation.

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 UOTHC is normally considered appropriate.

Paragraph 3-7 of this regulation provides that an honorable discharge is a separation with honor.  The honorable characterization is appropriate when the quality of the member's service generally has met the standards of acceptable conduct and performance of duty for Army personnel, or is otherwise so meritorious that any other characterization would be inappropriate.

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.  In view of the circumstances in this case, the applicant is not entitled to an upgrade of his discharge to honorable.  He has not shown error, injustice, or inequity for the relief he now requests.

2.  The applicant’s contentions of family problems back home and that he was promised a general discharge have been noted by the Board.  However, his commander was aware of his personal problems back home and felt the applicant decided to absent himself for that reason and also because he did not like his assignment in Germany.  It appears that the applicant chose to request an administrative discharge rather than risk the consequences of a court-martial and although he may now feel that he made the wrong choice, he should not be allowed to change his mind at this late date.

3.  In the absence of evidence to the contrary, it is presumed that the discharge proceedings were conducted in accordance with law and regulations applicable at the time. The character of the discharge is commensurate with his overall record.

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
In view of the foregoing, there is no basis for granting the applicant's request.

BOARD VOTE:

________  ________  ________  GRANT

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

_kak____  _rwa____  _jh_____    DENY APPLICATION

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

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2001062753	
SUFFIX		
RECON		
DATE BOARDED	20020205	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE		
DATE OF DISCHARGE		
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY		
DISCHARGE REASON		
BOARD DECISION	DENY	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.	A70	
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.