ABCMR Memorandum of 	AR2002083139
Consideration (cont.)

MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:   

	BOARD DATE:           3 July 2003                  
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR2002083139

	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. Raymond V. O'Connor, Jr. | | Chairperson
| Ms. Kathleen A. Newman | | Member
| Mr. Patrick H. McGann, Jr. | | 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 be upgraded.

APPLICANT STATES:  In effect, he had given the Army 3 years of good service before he started having marital problems.  He states that when his leave was denied, he went AWOL (absent without leave) to attempt to resolve problems with his wife.  He states that his marriage did dissolve, but that he remarried and has been productively employed for over 14 years.

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

He entered active duty on 21 July 1982.  He completed basic combat training and advanced individual training with award of the military occupational specialty (MOS) 13B (Cannon Crewman).  The applicant was promoted to specialist four on 1 February 1984.

On 19 November 1985, the applicant went AWOL and remained absent until 10 May 1986.

Although the discharge packet is not of record, the evidence of record shows that the applicant was discharged under the provisions of chapter 10, AR 635-200, for the good of the service in lieu of trial by court-martial.  In connection with such a discharge, the applicant was charged with the commission of an offense punishable under the UCMJ with a punitive discharge.  Procedurally, the applicant was required to consult with defense counsel and to voluntarily, and in writing, request separation from the Army in lieu of trial by court-martial.  In doing so, the applicant admitted guilt to the stipulated offenses under the UCMJ.  In the absence of information to the contrary, the Board is required to presume all requirements of law and regulation were met and the rights of the applicant were fully protected throughout the separation process.  It is also noted that the characterization of service for this type of discharge is normally under other than honorable conditions and that the applicant would have been aware of that prior to requesting discharge.  

The discharge authority accepted the request and directed that the applicant be discharged with a characterization of service of under other than honorable conditions.

The applicant was discharged on 15 January 1987.  He had 3 years, 7 months and 5 days creditable service and 172 days lost due to AWOL and 98 days of excess leave.

The DA Form 2-1 (Personnel Qualification Record) shows that the applicant was awarded the Army Service Ribbon and the Army Achievement Medal, and qualified as a marksman with the M-16 rifle and as an expert with the hand grenade.
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.

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.

2.  The Board notes the applicant’s post service activities, however, these activities are not so exceptionally meritorious as to outweigh the offense that resulted in his discharge.

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

__RVO__  __KAN__  _PHM___  DENY APPLICATION

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

INDEX

CASE ID | AR2002083139
SUFFIX |
RECON |
DATE BOARDED | 20030703
TYPE OF DISCHARGE |
DATE OF DISCHARGE |
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY |
DISCHARGE REASON |
BOARD DECISION | DENY
REVIEW AUTHORITY |
ISSUES         1. | Upgrade family problems
2. |
3. |
4. |
5. |
6. |