MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION


         IN THE CASE OF:
        


         BOARD DATE: 19 June 2003
         DOCKET NUMBER: AR2003083556

         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. Jessie B. Strickland		Analyst

The following members, a quorum, were present:

Mr. John N. Slone		Chairperson
Ms. Lana E. McGlynn		Member
Mr. William D. Powers		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 honorable.

APPLICANT STATES: That he worked as a chemical operations specialist and now has dermatological problems that were directly related to his exposure to various chemicals during the course of his duties. He further states that had he known these conditions would occur, he would have served his entire tour of duty because he now needs medical assistance from the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA).

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

He was inducted in Atlanta, Georgia, on 4 June 1971. At the time of his induction he indicated that his civilian occupation was that of a meat cutter. He completed his basic combat training at Fort Jackson, South Carolina, and was transferred to Fort McClellan, Alabama, to undergo advanced individual training (AIT) as a chemical operations apprentice. He completed his AIT and was transferred to Fort Sill, Oklahoma, where he was assigned as an Honest John Rocket crewman. He was advanced to the pay grade of E-4 on 16 February 1972.

The applicant went absent without leave (AWOL) on 11 May 1972 and remained absent until he returned to military control at Fort Gordon, Georgia, on 28 May 1972. On 19 June 1972, nonjudicial punishment (NJP) was imposed against him for the AWOL offense. His punishment consisted of a forfeiture of pay and extra duty.

On 17 July 1972, he was transferred to Fort Stewart, Georgia, for duty as a chemical staff specialist at the Chemical Biological Radiological (CBR) School.

On 22 August 1972, NJP was imposed against him for the wrongful possession and use of marijuana. His punishment consisted of a reduction to the pay grade of E-3 (suspended for 6 months), a forfeiture of pay, extra duty and restriction.

The applicant again went AWOL on 24 November 1972 and remained absent until he returned to military authorities on 1 August 1973 and charges were preferred against him for the AWOL offense.

On 3 August 1973, after consulting with counsel, the applicant submitted a request for discharge for the good of the service, under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 10, in lieu of trial by court-martial. In his request he indicated that he was making the request of his own free will, without coercion from anyone and that he was aware of the implications attached to his request. He also acknowledged that he understood that he could receive a discharge under other than honorable conditions and that he might be deprived of all benefits as a result of such a discharge. He further elected to submit a statement in his own behalf whereas he asserted that he did not like the Army, that he liked his freedom, that he liked being a civilian and that he understood he would receive an undesirable discharge but did not care because he had a good job.

The appropriate authority (a major general) approved his request and directed that he be furnished an Undesirable Discharge Certificate.

Accordingly, he was discharged under other than honorable conditions on 11 September 1973, under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 10, for the good of the service, in lieu of trial by court-martial. He had served 1 year, 6 months and 10 days of total active service and had 268 days of lost time due to AWOL.

On 17 January 1975, he applied to the Army Discharge Review Board (ADRB) for an upgrade of his discharge. The ADRB denied his application on 27 March 1975.

Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel. Chapter 10 of the 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 charges have been preferred, submit a voluntary request for discharge for the good of the service in lieu of trial by court-martial. A condition of submitting such a request is that the individual concerned must indicate that they have been briefed and understand the consequences of such a request as well as the discharge they might receive. A discharge under other than honorable conditions was at that time and is still normally considered appropriate.

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. 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.

2. Accordingly, the type of discharge directed and the reasons therefore were appropriate under the circumstances.

3. After being afforded the opportunity to assert his innocence before a trial by court-martial, he voluntarily requested a discharge for the good of the service in hopes of avoiding a punitive discharge and having a felony conviction on his records. While he may now believe that he made the wrong choice, he should not be allowed to change his mind at this late date, especially considering the length of his absences during a short period of time.

4. The applicant’s contentions have been considered by the Board. However, they are not sufficiently mitigating to warrant relief when compared to his overall record of service, his disciplinary record and the lack of mitigating circumstances to explain his misconduct. He clearly warranted the discharge he received.

5. 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.

6. 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

___js ___ __wdp___ ___lem__ DENY APPLICATION

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

---

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2003083556
SUFFIX
RECON	YYYYMMDD
DATE BOARDED	2003/06/19
TYPE OF DISCHARGE	UD
DATE OF DISCHARGE	1973/09/11
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY	AR635-200/CH10
DISCHARGE REASON	GD OF SVC
BOARD DECISION	DENY
REVIEW AUTHORITY
ISSUES 1. 689	144.7000/A70.00
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.