PROCEEDINGS


         IN THE CASE OF:


         BOARD DATE: 30 SEPTEMBER 2003
         DOCKET NUMBER: AR2003086696


         I certify that hereinafter is recorded the true and complete record of the proceedings of the Army Board for Correction of Military Records in the case of the above-named individual.

Mr. Carl W. S. Chun		Director
Mr. Kenneth H. Aucock		Analyst

The following members, a quorum, were present:

Mr. Raymond J. Wagner		Chairperson
Mr. Melvin H. Meyer		Member
Ms. Margaret V. Thompson		Member

         The applicant and counsel if any, did not appear before the Board.

         The Board considered the following evidence:

         Exhibit A - Application for correction of military
records
         Exhibit B - Military Personnel Records (including
         advisory opinion, if any)

FINDINGS :

1. The applicant has exhausted or the Board has waived the requirement for exhaustion of all administrative remedies afforded by existing law or regulations.

---

2. In effect, the applicant requests that his discharge under other than honorable conditions be upgraded.

3. The applicant states that he went AWOL because of a family emergency and was gone less than a week. He turned himself in and was given the option of taking an other than honorable conditions discharge or facing a trial by court-martial. He states that the punishment was excessive for the offense. He had no problems before this incident. He states that he has terminal cancer and would like this resolved before his death.

4. The applicant submits letters of support from family members and friends who all state that he has supported them and assisted with their problems during their time of need.

5. The applicant’s military records show that he enlisted in the Army for three years on 9 January 1980, completed training as a Hercules missile crewmember, and was assigned to the Fort Bliss, Texas.

6. On 2 July 1980 the applicant received a letter of appreciation for his participation during his battery's training test. On 24 April 1981 he was commended for being selected as a member of the battalion honor battery.

7. The applicant completed the primary leadership course at Fort Bliss on 13 August 1982.

8. The applicant reenlisted for three years in the pay grade of E-4 on 23 November 1982. He reenlisted for an avionics mechanic course scheduled to start on 28 October 1983 at Fort Gordon, Georgia.

9. On 7 March 1983 the applicant was awarded the Good Conduct Medal for the period 9 January 1980 to 8 January 1983.

10. The applicant was promoted to sergeant on 1 December 1983 with a date of rank of 5 November 1983.

11. In March 1984 the applicant was assigned to the 377th Medical Company in Korea.

12. A DA Form 268 (Report for Suspension of Favorable Personnel Actions) shows that the applicant departed AWOL on 7 September 1984. Another DA Form 268 shows that he was dropped from the rolls on 7 October 1984.

13. A 12 September 1984 personnel action form shows that the applicant went on leave on 6 August 1984. A 7 September 1984 form shows that he was AWOL as of that date, and on 7 October 1984 was dropped from the rolls. 14. A 14 November 1984 military police report shows that he surrendered to military authorities at the Long Beach Naval Station in California on that date, and that he had been AWOL as of 3 August 1984, and dropped from the rolls as of 3 September 1984. That report shows that he was transferred to the personnel control facility at Fort Ord, California.

15. An AWOL Deserter Data Sheet completed on the applicant on 15 November 1984 indicates that the applicant went AWOL because his wife did not like him [to be] in the military (not co-located in Korea), and because his mother was on drugs and had mental problems. That sheet indicates that the applicant desired to be discharged under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 10, accepting an under other than honorable conditions discharge. That form shows that if he were returned to military duty he would try to serve out his time. The commander of the processing company at the personnel control facility recommended a discharge under the provisions of the above cited regulation, as did the commander of the personnel control facility.

16. On 19 November 1984 charges were preferred against the applicant for AWOL from 3 August 1984 to 14 November 1984. The applicant consulted with counsel and voluntarily requested discharge for the good of the service under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 10. He stated that he understood that he could request such discharge because of the charges preferred against him which authorized the imposition of a bad conduct or dishonorable discharge. He stated that he was making the request of his own free will and had not been subjected to any coercion whatsoever by any person. He acknowledged that he was guilty of the charges against him. He stated that under no circumstances did he desire further rehabilitation and that he had no desire to perform further military service. He stated that he understood the nature and consequences of the under than honorable conditions discharge that he might receive. He declined to submit a statement in his own behalf.

17. The applicant's commanding officer in forwarding his request, indicated that the applicant was pending charges for being AWOL from 3 August 1984 to 14 November 1984. He stated that the applicant's pattern of behavior indicated that retention was neither practical nor desirable. He recommended approval of his request with a discharge under other than honorable conditions. The intermediate commanders recommended likewise.

18. On 29 November 1984, in an attempt to reconstruct the applicant's records, the processing company of the personnel control facility, prepared three DA Forms 4187 (Personal Action) based on the information contained in the 14 November 1984 military police report. Those forms show that he was AWOL on 3 August 1984, dropped from the rolls on 3 September 1984, and present for duty on 14 November 1984.

19. On 26 December 1984 the separation authority approved the applicant's request and directed that the applicant be discharged under other than honorable conditions. He was discharged on 19 March 1985. He had 4 years, 10 months, and 10 days of service. His DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) shows that he was separated from the service on temporary records and his affidavit. It also shows dates of lost time as 840803-841113. It does not show award of the Good Conduct Medal.

20. 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, the separation authority may direct a general discharge certificate, if such is merited by the member's overall record during the current enlistment.

CONCLUSIONS:

1. The applicant’s voluntary request for separation for the good of the service to avoid trial by court-martial was in conformance with applicable regulations. There is no indication that the request was made under coercion or duress. Nonetheless, there was an error concerning the applicant's period of AWOL, apparently because of the lack of his records and lack of information from his unit in Korea. His period of AWOL was from 7 September 1984 through 13 November 1984, and not from 3 August 1984 through 13 November 1984, as reflected in the 14 November 1984 military police report and the later documents prepared by the personnel control facility at Fort Ord.

2. The applicant’s AWOL is not excusable. The applicant had over 4 years of service in the Army, and should have known better. However, taking into consideration that the applicant's commanders at the personnel control facility were not aware of the applicant's record of service, coupled with the applicant's stated desire to leave the Army because of personal difficulties, his discharge under other than honorable conditions was perceptible.

3. The Board notes that the applicant had received the Good Conduct Medal, and was considered a good enough soldier to be advanced to the rank of sergeant. The Board also notes the information contained in the AWOL Deserter Data Sheet, which shows that the applicant indicated that he went AWOL because of problems with his wife and with his mother. His discharge was not unwarranted; however, the characterization of his discharge, in view of his good and honorable service prior to the one AWOL incident, may have been too harsh.
4. The Board also takes note of the expressions of support from the applicant's family members and friends. The character of the applicant's service prior to his AWOL and his apparent good post service conduct warrant reconsideration of the characterization of his service. It is the opinion of this Board based on the circumstances and facts shown, that the applicant's discharge should be upgraded to general, under honorable conditions. The Board notes, however, that the totality of his service was not honorable. Had he opted trial by court-martial, he could have received a dishonorable or bad conduct discharge. Consequently, an upgrade of his discharge to honorable is not deemed proper.
5. The applicant's DD Form 214 should be corrected to show award of the Army Good Conduct Medal, and to show the dates of his time lost as from 7 September 1984 through 13 November 1984.

6. In view of the foregoing, the applicant’s records should be corrected as recommended below.

RECOMMENDATION:

That all of the Department of the Army records related to this case be corrected by showing that the individual concerned received a general discharge under honorable conditions, that he was awarded the Army Good Conduct Medal, and that his time lost was from 7 September 1984 through 13 November 1984.

BOARD VOTE:

__RJW__ __MHM__ __MVT__ GRANT AS STATED IN RECOMMENDATION

________ ________ ________ GRANT FORMAL HEARING

________ ________ ________ DENY APPLICATION




                  ___Raymond V. Wagner______
                  CHAIRPERSON

---

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2003086696
SUFFIX
RECON	YYYYMMDD
DATE BOARDED	20030930
TYPE OF DISCHARGE	(HD, GD, UOTHC, UD, BCD, DD, UNCHAR)
DATE OF DISCHARGE	YYYYMMDD
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY	AR . . . . .
DISCHARGE REASON
BOARD DECISION	GRANT
REVIEW AUTHORITY
ISSUES 1.	110.00
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.