RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


      IN THE CASE OF:


      BOARD DATE:        4 October 2005
      DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20050002228


      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             |
|     |Ms. Yvonne Foskey                 |     |Analyst              |


      The following members, a quorum, were present:

|     |Mr. Mark D. Manning               |     |Chairperson          |
|     |Mr. Larry C. Bergquist            |     |Member               |
|     |Ms. Carmen Duncan                 |     |Member               |

      The Board considered the following evidence:

      Exhibit A - Application for correction of military records.

      Exhibit B - Military Personnel Records (including advisory opinion,
if any).

THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE:

1.  The applicant requests, in effect, that under other than honorable
conditions (UOTHC) discharge be upgraded.

2.  The applicant states, in effect, that he would like to have his
discharge reviewed and an upgrade considered so that he may attempt to
reenlist in the Armed Forces.

3.  The applicant provides the following documents in support of his
application:  Self-Authored Letter, dated 10 March 2004; and Army Discharge
Review Board (ADRB) Case Summary, dated 19 December 2003.

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  The applicant’s record shows he enlisted in the Regular Army and
entered active duty on 1 June 1999.  He was trained in, awarded, and served
in military occupational specialty (MOS) 13B (Cannon Crewmember), and the
highest rank he attained while serving on active duty was private first
class (PFC).  His record documents no acts of valor, significant
achievement or service warranting special recognition.

2.  On 3 October 2000, a Charge Sheet (DD Form 458) was prepared preferring
court-martial charges against the applicant for two specifications of
violating Article 86 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ), by
being absent without leave (AWOL) from on or about 28 February through on
or about
28 March 2000; and by being AWOL from on or about 16 May through on or
about 2 October 2000.

3.  On 5 October 2000, the applicant consulted with legal counsel and was
advised of the basis for the contemplated trial by court-martial, the
effects of an UOTHC and of the rights available to him.  Subsequent to
receiving this legal counsel, the applicant voluntarily requested discharge
for the good of the service, in lieu of trial by court-martial.

4.  In his request for discharge, the applicant acknowledged he understood
that if his discharge request was approved, he could be deprived of many or
all Army benefits, that he could be ineligible for many or all benefits
administered by the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA), and that he could
be deprived of his rights and benefits as a veteran under both Federal and
State law.  He further indicated that he understood that he could encounter
substantial prejudice in civilian life by reason of an UOTHC.
5.  On 19 July 2001, the separation authority approved the applicant’s
request for discharge and directed that he receive an UOTHC.  On 27 August
2001, the applicant was discharged accordingly.  The DD Form 214 he was
issued confirms he completed a total of 1 year, 10 months, and 8 days of
creditable active military service.

6.  On 19 December 2003, the ADRB considered the applicant’s request to
upgrade his discharge.  The ADRB determined that the discharge was proper
and equitable and it unanimously voted not to upgrade the applicant’s
discharge.

7.  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.
An UOTHC discharge is normally considered appropriate for members separated
under this provision of the regulation.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant's request to have his UOTHC upgraded and the supporting
documents he submitted were carefully considered.  However, there is an
insufficient evidentiary basis to support granting the requested relief.

2.  The evidence of record confirms the applicant was charged with the
commission of an offense punishable under the UCMJ with a punitive
discharge. After consulting with defense counsel, he voluntarily requested
discharge in lieu of trial by court-martial.  The record further confirms
all requirements of law and regulation were met and that the rights of the
applicant were fully protected throughout the separation process.

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.
BOARD VOTE:

________  ________  ________  GRANT FULL RELIEF

________  ________  ________  GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

___MDM_  ___LCB _  __CD ___  DENY APPLICATION

BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION:

The evidence presented does not demonstrate the existence of a probable
error or injustice.  Therefore, the Board determined that the overall
merits of this case are insufficient as a basis for correction of the
records of the individual concerned.





                                  _____Mark D. Manning___
                                            CHAIRPERSON



                                    INDEX

|CASE ID                 |AR20050002228                           |
|SUFFIX                  |                                        |
|RECON                   |                                        |
|DATE BOARDED            |2005/10/04                              |
|TYPE OF DISCHARGE       | UOTHC)                                 |
|DATE OF DISCHARGE       |2001/08/27                              |
|DISCHARGE AUTHORITY     |AR635-200 . . . . .                     |
|DISCHARGE REASON        |Chapter 10                              |
|BOARD DECISION          |DENY                                    |
|REVIEW AUTHORITY        |Mr. Chun                                |
|ISSUES         1.       |144                                     |
|2.                      |                                        |
|3.                      |                                        |
|4.                      |                                        |
|5.                      |                                        |
|6.                      |                                        |


-----------------------
[pic]