MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:   

	BOARD DATE:           29 May 2003                  
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR2002079338

	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. G. E. Vandenberg | | Analyst

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

| Mr. Luther L. Santiful | | Chairperson
| Mr. Lester Echols | | Member
| Mr. Frank C. Jones, II | | 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 a general discharge under honorable conditions.

APPLICANT STATES:  In effect, that he was young and immature at the time he committed the offense that led to his discharge.  He was depressed over his Grandmother's death and homesick.  He found it impossible to return to Germany, but he neither understood nor considered the consequences of his behavior.  He has grown up and still ashamed of his behavior.  However, wishes to be able to admit that he was in the military.  He describes his current life and the efforts he has made to improve his knowledge and skills.

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

The applicant entered active duty on 5 October 1979 at age 24.  He completed basic combat training and advanced individual training in military occupational specialty (MOS) 64C  (Motor Transport Operator) and was posted to Germany for duty. 

The applicant was reported AWOL (absent without leave) on 23 June 1980.  He surrendered to the military control on 4 October 1982.

On 9 December 1983, court-martial charges where brought against the applicant for 1,263 days of AWOL.

He consulted with counsel and was advised of his rights and options.  He submitted a request for discharge for the good of the service in lieu of trial by court-martial under the provisions of Army Regulations 635-200, chapter 10.  He acknowledged he had been advised of and understood his rights under the Uniform Code of Military Justice, that he was guilty as charged or guilty of a lesser included offense for which he could also receive a punitive discharge and that, as a result of his request, he could receive an UOTHC discharge which would deprive him of many or all of his benefits as a veteran, that he could expect to experience substantial prejudice in civilian life if he received an UOTHC discharge, and that there is no automatic upgrading or review of a less than honorable discharge.

On 24 January 1984, the discharge authority approved the applicant's request and directed that he be discharged UOTHC.

The applicant was discharged UOTHC, on 2 February 1984.  He had 10 months and 13 days of creditable service with 1,263 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 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.

The Uniform Code of Military Justice, Table of Maximum Punishments shows that a punitive discharge is authorized for any AWOL of more that 30 days.

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.  The discharge proceedings were conducted in accordance with law and regulations applicable at the time. The character of the discharge is commensurate with the applicant's overall record of military service.  His extensive AWOL outweighs his 10 months of creditable service.  

2.  The applicant's contention that he was young and immature at the time is not sufficiently mitigating to warrant relief.  The Board notes that the applicant was 24 years of age at the time he enlisted, had satisfactory completed basic and advanced training and had served for five months in Germany before going AWOL.  His satisfactory performance demonstrates his capacity to serve and shows that he was neither too young nor immature.

3.   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.

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

__LLS __  __LE  ___  __FCJ___  DENY APPLICATION

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

INDEX

CASE ID | AR2002079338
SUFFIX |
RECON |
DATE BOARDED | 20030529
TYPE OF DISCHARGE |
DATE OF DISCHARGE |
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY |
DISCHARGE REASON |
BOARD DECISION | DENY
REVIEW AUTHORITY |
ISSUES         1. | Upgrade discharge
2. |
3. |
4. |
5. |
6. |