RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


      IN THE CASE OF:


      BOARD DATE:            18 JULY 2006
      DOCKET NUMBER:   AR20050017990


      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. Jessie B. Strickland          |     |Analyst              |


      The following members, a quorum, were present:

|     |Mr. Lester Echols                 |     |Chairperson          |
|     |Mr. Patrick McGann                |     |Member               |
|     |Ms. Ernestine Fields              |     |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 that his discharge under other than honorable
conditions be upgraded to honorable.

2.  The applicant states that he did not fully understand the type of
discharge he was signing for at the time.  He goes on to state that he was
model Soldier; however, the death of his sister in 1991 created a bad
situation for his family as his father was blind and his mother had asthma
and they needed him home.

3.  The applicant provides a letter from his mother dated 10 December 2005,
a memorandum for record from the Houston Military Entrance Processing
Station (MEPS) dated 19 June 1991, his emergency leave orders, an illegible
photocopy of a letter from the American Red Cross, a letter from his mother
dated 29 April 1991, a letter from a minister dated 18 April 1991, a letter
from a doctor dated
22 April 1991, regarding his father’s medical condition, a third-party
letter dated 16 April 1991 regarding the applicant’s situation at the time,
and two letters from his chain of command regarding his unit’s deployment
to Southwest Asia (SWA).
CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  He enlisted in the Regular Army in Houston, Texas, on 7 November 1989
for a period of 4 years, training as a cannon crewman, assignment to
Europe, and a cash enlistment bonus.  He completed his one-station unit
training (OSUT) at Fort Sill, Oklahoma, and was transferred to an artillery
battery in Baumholder, Germany on 2 March 1990.  He was advanced to the pay
grade of E-3 on 1 July 1990.

2.  On 30 December 1990, the applicant deployed with his unit to SWA
(Southwest Asia - Saudi Arabia) in support of Operation Desert
Shield/Storm.

3.  On 21 February 1991, orders were published that authorized the
applicant to take 14 days of emergency leave due to the serious illness of
his sister, which was reported by a Red Cross message dated 20 February
1991.  The orders also contained information and point of contacts for the
applicant should he require assistance while on emergency leave.

4.  The applicant requested and received two 5-day extensions of his leave
from the Personnel Assistance Point (PAP) in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania,
and was instructed to report to the nearest military installation to sign
in before his leave expired.  His leave with the two extensions expired on
16 March 1991 and his sister passed away on 30 March 1991.  The applicant
signed in at Fort Sam Houston on Friday, 6 April 1991 at 1525 hours and was
advised to report back to the strength management office on Monday, 8 April
1991.  The applicant was advised of the documents needed (sister’s death
certificate) to remain attached and to apply for a compassionate
reassignment.  The applicant failed to report to the attached unit.

5.  The applicant surrendered to military authorities at the Houston, MEPS
on 17 June 1991 and was transferred to Fort Sill, Oklahoma where a charge
was preferred against him for being absent without leave (AWOL) from
9 March to 17 June 1991.

6.  On 28 June 1991, after consulting with defense 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 understood the charges
that had been preferred against him, 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 admitted that he was guilty
of the charges against him or of lesser included offenses which authorized
the imposition of a bad conduct or dishonorable discharge.  He 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 declined to submit a statement or
explanation in his own behalf, indicated that he wanted no further
rehabilitation, that he did not desire to perform any further military
service and that he did not want a separation medical/physical examination.
 He also stated that he was submitting the request of his own free will and
had not been subjected to any coercion whatsoever by any person.

7.  The applicant’s commander interviewed the applicant and indicated that
the applicant was charged with being AWOL for 100 days, that he was single
and had no dependents.  He further indicated that the applicant had become
disillusioned with the military and that his reasons for going AWOL were
personal reasons.  He recommended that the applicant’s request for
discharge be approved.

8.  The appropriate authority approved his request on 15 August 1991 and
directed that he be discharged under other than honorable conditions.

9.  Accordingly, he was discharged under other than honorable conditions on
23 August 1991, under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter
10, in lieu of trial by court-martial.  He had served 1 year, 6 months, and
8 days of total active service and had 100 days of lost time due to AWOL.
10.  There is no evidence in the available records to show that the
applicant ever applied to the Army Discharge Review Board (ADRB) for an
upgrade of his discharge within ADRB’s 15-year statute of limitations.

11.  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 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 admit
guilt to the charges against them or of a lesser included offense which
authorizes the imposition of a bad conduct or dishonorable discharge and
they 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 is normally considered
appropriate.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

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.  In doing so he admitted guilt to the
charges against him.

4.  The applicant's contention that he did not understand the type of
discharge he signed for has been noted and found to be without merit.  The
applicant submitted the request for discharge and acknowledged by his
signature that he had been advised and understood the possible effects of a
discharge under other than honorable conditions and that he was requesting
the discharge of his own free will.

5.  While the Board is sympathetic to the applicant’s loss of a family
member, help was available to the applicant and it was incumbent on him to
follow the instructions he was given before he became AWOL.  The applicant
was properly advised by the Fort Sam Houston staff to report back on 8
April 1991 for further processing; however, he failed to comply with those
instructions.

6.  Additionally, the applicant has failed to show through the evidence
submitted with his application or the evidence of record that he made an
honest effort to secure the documents needed to support a request for a
compassionate reassignment.  Accordingly, there was no basis for an
attachment to a military installation during the period in question.

7.  The applicant’s contentions and supporting documents have been noted;
however, they are not sufficiently mitigating to warrant an upgrade of his
discharge when considering the amount of lost time he had during such a
short period of service.  While his obligations to his family are
understood, the applicant also had an obligation to his unit, which was
serving in combat and the Army, obligations he chose to ignore.
Accordingly, his service does not rise to the level of honorable service.

8.  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

___LE___  ____PM_  ___EF___  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.



                                  ______Lester Echols______
                                            CHAIRPERSON
                                    INDEX

|CASE ID                 |AR20050017990                           |
|SUFFIX                  |                                        |
|RECON                   |                                        |
|DATE BOARDED            |20060718                                |
|TYPE OF DISCHARGE       |(UOTHC)                                 |
|DATE OF DISCHARGE       |1991/08/23                              |
|DISCHARGE AUTHORITY     |AR635-200/CH10 . . . . .                |
|DISCHARGE REASON        |GD OF SVC                               |
|BOARD DECISION          |(DENY)                                  |
|REVIEW AUTHORITY        |                                        |
|ISSUES                  |689/A70.00                              |
|1.144.7000              |                                        |
|2.                      |                                        |
|3.                      |                                        |
|4.                      |                                        |
|5.                      |                                        |
|6.                      |                                        |


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