MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:       

	BOARD DATE:            14 October 1998 
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AC98-09941

	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	
	Ms. Joyce A. Wright		Analyst	

The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Mr. John N. Slone		Chairperson	
	Mr. Ernest M. Willcher		Member	
	Mr. Robert W. Garrett		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 discharge under other than honorable conditions be upgraded to a general discharge. 

APPLICANT STATES:  In effect, that he served honorably in the United States Marine Corps (USMC) and enlisted in the US Army for a different type of
duty that would allow him to attend college.  He also states that he had difficulty in adapting to the Army way of life, and his personal conflict at home caused him to be irrational and use a series of bad judgements on himself.  He later sought
counseling for his conflicts and was able to make a more rational decision on his life, which was the cause of his discharge.

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

He initially enlisted in the USMC on 27 June 1983 for a period of 3 years and was honorably released from active duty on 26 June 1986.

He enlisted in the USAR under the Delayed Entry Program on 3 July 1986 for
a period of 4 years.  He enlisted in the Regular Army on 23 July 1986 for a period of 4 years and training as a personnel management specialist.

Charges were preferred against the applicant on 30 November 1987 for two specifications of larceny and 16 specifications of fraud which involved his
stealing a checkbook, falsifying Identification Cards and falsifying checks.

After consulting with counsel, he submitted a request for discharge for the good
of the service in lieu of trial by court martial, under the provisions of Army Regulation AR 635-200, chapter 10.  He also elected not to submit a statement in his own behalf. 

The appropriate authority approved his request on 11 January 1988 and directed that he be discharged under other than honorable conditions.

The applicant was barred from reenlistment on 20 January 1988 for the aforementioned offenses.

Accordingly, he was discharged under other than honorable conditions on
1 February 1988 under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 10, in lieu of trial by court-martial.  He had served 4 years, 6 months, and 8 days of total active service.

The applicant applied to the Army Discharge Review Board (ADRB) for an upgrade of his discharge on 1 April 1998.  The ADRB determined that his
discharge was proper and equitable, and denied his request on 6 August 1998.
Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for 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.  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.  Careful consideration has been given to the applicant’s contentions.  However, the multiple charges against him for larceny and fraud are to serious
for equitable relief in this case.

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 the aforementioned requirement

4.  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

__EW___  __RWG _  __JS____  DENY APPLICATION

						Loren G. Harrell
						Director