MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:       .

	BOARD DATE:           6 June 2002                   
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR2001062843

	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. Edmund P. Mercanti		Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Mr. Stanley Kelley		Chairperson	
	Mr. John T. Meixell		Member	
	Mr. Thomas E. O'Shaughnessy		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 undesirable discharge be upgraded to an honorable discharge.

APPLICANT STATES:  While he was on active duty, his records kept getting lost, which kept him from being paid.  When he didn’t receive any money to send to his pregnant wife, he decided that he had to go absent without leave (AWOL) to earn some money for her.

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

He enlisted in the Regular Army on 5 March 1971, was awarded the military occupational specialty of mechanical maintenance helper, and was stationed in the continental United States.

He went AWOL from 22 thru 29 July 1971; 2 thru 9 August 1971; 24 January thru 27 February 1972; 5 thru 8 May 1972; and 19 June thru 4 October 1972, for which he accepted nonjudicial punishment on three occasions, and was convicted by special court-martial on one occasion.  The punishments imposed and court-martial sentence included forfeiture of pay.

When the applicant was apprehended during his last period of AWOL, court-martial charges were preferred against him.  At that time he submitted a request for discharge for the good of the service, in lieu of trial by court-martial.  In a sworn statement he submitted along with his request, he stated “I have been explained to that I will receive no benefits what so ever.  Also that I will receive an undesirable discharge if this form is accepted.”

The applicant’s request was accepted by the appropriate authority and he was issued an Undesirable Discharge Certificate on 17 November 1972.

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 and applicable law and regulations, it is concluded:

1.  Five periods of AWOL, two of which were over 30 days, is more than sufficient upon which to base an undesirable discharge.  As such, the Board concludes that there wasn’t any error or injustice in the type of discharge or characterization of service given to the applicant.

2.  While the applicant states that he did not receive pay because his records kept getting lost, he has not submitted any evidence to support his allegation.  However, the Board notes that the applicant would not have been paid for any time he was AWOL, and that forfeitures of pay due to his NJP’s and special court-martial would also garnish his pay.  Therefore, while the applicant may have received no pay due on many occasions, it would appear more likely that the lack of pay was due to his own misconduct, not on administrative error.

3.  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

___sk ___  ___jtm___  ___teo   _  DENY APPLICATION

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

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2001062843	
SUFFIX		
RECON	YYYYMMDD	
DATE BOARDED	20020606	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE	(HD, GD, UOTHC, UD, BCD, DD, UNCHAR)	
DATE OF DISCHARGE	YYYYMMDD	
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY	AR .  .  .  .  .  	
DISCHARGE REASON		
BOARD DECISION	(NC, GRANT , DENY, GRANT PLUS)	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.	A71.00	
2.	A93.07	
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.