MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:

	BOARD DATE:           13 January 1999
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR1998013186

	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. Loren G. Harrell		Director	
	Mrs. Carolyn G. Wade		Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Mr.Thomas Kuhn 		Chairperson	
	Mr. Walter Morrison		Member	
	Ms. Margaret Thompson		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:  In effect, that his under other than honorable conditions (UOHC) discharge be upgraded to honorable.

APPLICANT STATES:  In effect, that he started drinking after he entered the service, that he is an alcoholic, and that his drinking contributed to his military problems.  He further states he went AWOL because of family problems.

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

On 27 December 1968 the applicant enlisted in the Regular Army for a period of 4 years.  He enlisted for the US Army Training of Choice Enlistment Option.  He successfully completed basic combat training at Fort Leonard Wood, Missouri and advanced individual training (AIT) at Fort Knox, Kentucky.  Upon completion of AIT he was awarded the military occupational specialty (MOS) 11E (Armor Crewmember), and was assigned to Aberdeen Proving Grounds, Maryland for his first permanent duty station.

The applicant’s record documents that the highest permanent grade he held on active duty was specialist/E-4 and that he received the National Defense Service Medal.  The record contains no documented acts of valor, achievement, or service warranting special recognition.  

On 12 September 1969 the applicant reenlisted for 4 years.  On 5 January 1970 he departed his unit in an AWOL status from Aberdeen Proving Grounds.  He was dropped from the rolls (DFR) on 3 February 1970, and returned to military control on 2 March 1970.  He accepted nonjudicial punishment for this 56-day period of AWOL.  His punishment consisted of a reduction in grade to private first class/E-3 and a forfeiture of $50.00 for two months.  The applicant departed his unit again in an AWOL status on 9 April 1970 and returned to military control on 22 July 1970.

On or about 4 August 1970 the applicant was assigned to Fort Carson, Colorado. 
On 16 October 1970 he departed his unit in an AWOL status.  He was dropped from the rolls on 19 November 1970, was apprehended, and returned to military control on 31 August 1971 at Fort Leonard Wood, Missouri.  On 31 August 1970 he was charged with the aforementioned period of AWOL.

On 28 September 1971 the applicant, after consulting with counsel, voluntarily requested discharge for the good of the service-in lieu of trial by court-martial, under the provisions of chapter 10, AR 635-200.  This request was made after counsel advised the applicant of the contemplated trial by court-martial, the maximum punishment, and the possible effects of a UOHC discharge.  The applicant also attested to the fact that he fully understood that he would be deprived of many or all Army benefits, that he may be ineligible for many or all benefits administered by the Department of Veteran Affairs, and that he may be deprived of veteran benefits under state and federal law.

On 5 October 1971 the appropriate authority approved the applicant’s request for discharge and directed issuance of a UOHC and a reduction in grade to private/E-1.  Accordingly, on 21 October 1971 the applicant was discharged after completing 1 year, 4 months, and 15 days of active military service.

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, applicable law and regulations, it is concluded:

1.  The evidence of record does not support the applicant’s contentions that a drinking problem or family problems contributed to his misconduct, neither did he provide any independent corroborating evidence in support of his contentions.

2.  The evidence of record is clear, and shows the applicant was charged with the commission of an offense punishable under the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) with a punitive discharge.  After consulting with legal counsel, he voluntarily, and in writing, requested 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.

3.  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. There is no indication that the request was made under coercion or duress.

4.  The discharge proceedings were conducted in accordance with law and regulation applicable at the time.  The reason for and the character of the discharge are commensurate with the applicant’s overall record of military service.

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 the aforementioned 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

__TK____  __WM___  __MT___  DENY APPLICATION

						Loren G. Harrell
						Director

INDEX

CASE ID	AC98-11100	
SUFFIX		
RECON	YYYYMMDD	
DATE BOARDED	19990113	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE	UOTHC	
DATE OF DISCHARGE	19711021	
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY	AR635-200, C10	
DISCHARGE REASON	In lieu of trial by court-martial	
BOARD DECISION	DENY	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1. 9309		
2.  9319		
3.		
                      4.		
5.		
6.