MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:   

	BOARD DATE:           10 October 2002
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR2002075794

	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. Nancy L. Amos		Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Mr. Raymond J. Wagner		Chairperson	
	Mr. Roger W. Able		Member	
	Mr. John T. Meixell		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 a general discharge under honorable conditions.

APPLICANT STATES:  That he was immature.  He never had any problems with law enforcement officials prior to going into the Army.  Since his discharge he has been a good, law-abiding citizen.  He provides his discharge packet and Report of Transfer or Discharge, DD Form 214, as supporting evidence.

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

He was born on 20 September 1955.  He enlisted in the Regular Army on         17 November 1972.  He completed basic training.

On 13 March 1973, the applicant accepted nonjudicial punishment (NJP) under Article 15, Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) for absenting himself from his unit from 3 to on or about 14 March 1973.  On 26 April 1973, he accepted NJP under Article 15, UCMJ for absenting himself from his unit from 2 to on or about 13 April 1973.  On 17 May 1973, he accepted NJP under Article 15, UCMJ for breaking restriction.

The applicant completed advanced individual training and was awarded military occupational specialty 94B (Cook).  

The applicant apparently accepted NJP under Article 15, UCMJ around      August 1973 but appealed the punishment.  A Record of Appellate or Other Supplementary Actions under Article 15, UCMJ, DA Form 2627-2, dated             6 August 1973 indicates that the proceedings were legally conducted and the appeal was denied.  

On 12 October 1973, the applicant completed a separation physical and was found qualified for separation.

On 16 October 1973, court-martial charges were preferred against the applicant charging him with being absent without leave (AWOL) from 17 August to on or about 9 October 1973.

On 15 October 1973, after consulting with legal counsel, the applicant voluntarily requested a discharge under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 10 for the good of the service in lieu of trial by court-martial.  The applicant was advised of the effects of an undesirable discharge and that he might be deprived of many or all Army and Veterans Administration benefits.  He elected not to submit a statement in his own behalf.

On 31 October 1973, the appropriate authority approved the request and directed the applicant be furnished an Undesirable Discharge Certificate.
On 6 November 1973, the applicant was discharged with an undesirable discharge, in pay grade E-1, under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 10, discharge in lieu of trial by court-martial.  He had completed 8 months and 17 days of creditable active service and had 93 days of lost time. 

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.  An undesirable discharge was normally considered appropriate.

On 21 July 1989, the Army Discharge Review Board (ADRB) denied the applicant's request for an upgraded 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.  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.

2.  The applicant’s voluntary request for separation under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 10, for the good of the service to avoid trial by court-martial, was administratively correct and in conformance with applicable regulations.  There is no indication that the request was made under coercion or duress.  

3.  The Board notes the applicant's age at the time he enlisted; however, his contention that he was immature is not sufficiently mitigating to warrant relief.  The Board notes that he was able to successfully complete basic training and so knew the Army's standards of military conduct.  While the Board has taken cognizance of his age and his prior and subsequent good service, none of these factors, either individually or in sum, warrant the relief requested.

4.  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

__RJW__  __RWA__  __JTM__  DENY APPLICATION

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

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2002075794	
SUFFIX		
RECON		
DATE BOARDED	2002/10/10	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE	UD	
DATE OF DISCHARGE	1973/11/06	
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY	AR 635-200, ch 10 	
DISCHARGE REASON	A70.00	
BOARD DECISION	DENY	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.	110.00	
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.