MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:   

	BOARD DATE:           27 January 1999                   
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AC98-12460
				   AR1998014246

	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	
	Mr. William Blakely		Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Mr. James E. Vick		Chairperson	
	Ms. Margaret K. Patterson		Member	
	Mr. John H. Kern		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 discharge under other than honorable conditions be upgraded.  He also requests that his medical injury (hearing) be investigated.

APPLICANT STATES:  That his hearing loss as a result of his armor duties impacted his ability to make decisions concerning his discharge.  He submits a section of his entrance and separation medical examination that shows his hearing during entrance and separation from the ARMY.

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

The applicant entered the Army on 7 May 1974 for a period of 4 years.  His highest rank attained was private (E-2).  He was awarded military occupational specialty 11E (Armor Crewman).

Upon completion of advanced individual training the applicant was assigned to Fort Hood, Texas with a reporting date of 30 September 1974.  The applicant did not report to Fort Hood and was declared AWOL on 30 September 1974.  He returned to military control at Elsworth Air Force Base, Rapid City, South Dakota on 20 November 1974 and placed in confinement.

On 11 December 1974 the applicant was transferred to the Personnel Control Facility, Fort Carson, Colorado.  He received nonjudicial punishment for being AWOL from 30 September 1974 through 20 November 1974.  His punishment consisted of a forfeiture of $190.00 pay per month for 2 months.  He went AWOL again on 23 December 1974 and returned to military control on 25 January 1975 at Fort Carson.

On 26 January 1975 the applicant was assigned to the 4th Replacement  Detachment at Fort Carson and subsequently assigned to Company B, 6/32 Armor on 27 January 1974.  On 24 February 1975 the applicant went AWOL and returned to military control on 1 May 1975 at the Personnel Control Facility, Fort Lewis, Washington.

The applicant was notified on 6 May 1975 of the charges preferred against him for being AWOL from 23 December 1974 through 27 January 1975 
and 24 February 1975 through 30 April 1975.  After consulting with counsel he voluntarily submitted a request to be discharged for the good of the service in lieu of trial by court-martial.  With his request he submitted a statement in his own behalf describing his life on an Indian reservation with his parents and the impact of his mother’s diabetes on his family.  He stated that his father needed him at home and requested favorable consideration of his chapter 10 in the form of a general discharge.

The request for discharge was approved by the appropriate authority and on 
29 May 1975 the applicant was discharged from the Army under other than honorable conditions 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 
7 months and 4 days of total active service and had 172 days of lost time due to AWOL and confinement.  His separation medical examination dated 8 May 1975 indicated a hearing loss but cleared him for separation.

The applicant submitted a request for an upgrade of his discharge to the Army Discharge Review Board, and it was denied on 16 June 1976.

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 submit a request for discharge for the good of the service in lieu of trial by court-martial.  The request may be submitted at any time after court-martial charges have been preferred.  Although an honorable or general discharge is authorized, 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 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.  The applicant chose to request an administrative discharge rather than risk the consequences of a court-martial.  Although he may now feel that he made the wrong choice, he should not be allowed to change his mind at this late date.

3.  The contention of the applicant that his hearing loss impaired his judgement  to select his options for discharge is not supported by either evidence submitted with the application or the evidence of record.

4.  The applicant’s separation medical examination dated 8 May 1975 determined that he was qualified for retention/separation and indicated that he suffered from a hearing loss.  Likewise, there is no indication in the examination to show that his hearing was so severe to impact his decision making process. 

5.  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

___X_____  ____X____  ___X_____  DENY APPLICATION

						Loren G. Harrell
						Director

INDEX

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