MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:   

	BOARD DATE:           19 November 1998                   
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AC98-11402

	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. Nancy Amos		Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Mr. Fred N. Eichorn		Chairperson	
	Mr. Thomas A. Pagan		Member	
	Ms. Barbara J. Ellis		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 (UOTHC) be upgraded.

APPLICANT STATES:  In effect, that after he was unjustly demoted, he became depressed.  The leadership did not help him become a better soldier, so he did not care anymore and went absent without leave (AWOL).  He has since become mature and very responsible.

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

On 6 March 1973, he enlisted in the Regular Army.  He completed basic training and advanced individual training and was awarded military occupational specialty 11B (Light Weapons Infantryman).

Between March and October 1974, the applicant accepted non-judicial punishment on four different occasions for leaving his appointed place of duty without proper authority; for wrongfully possessing marijuana; for breaking restriction and failure to go to his appointed place of duty; and for failure to go to his appointed place of duty, respectively.
On 20 February 1975, court-martial charges were preferred against the applicant charging him with being AWOL for the period 6 December 1974 to 19 February 1975.

On 27 February 1975, the applicant completed a separation physical and was found qualified for separation.

On 16 April 1975, after consulting with legal counsel, the applicant voluntarily requested a discharge under the provisions of Chapter 10, Army Regulation  635-200 for the good of the service in lieu of trial by court-martial.  The applicant was advised of the effects of a discharge under other than honorable conditions and that he might be deprived of many or all Army and Veterans Administration benefits.  He submitted a statement in his own behalf.

On 24 April 1975, the appropriate authority approved the request and directed the applicant receive an undesirable discharge.

On 30 April 1975, the applicant was discharged, with a discharge UOTHC, in pay grade E-1 for the good of the service.  He had completed 1 year, 11 months and 10 days of creditable active service and had 75 days of lost time. 

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.  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.

2.  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.  The character of separation is appropriate considering the length of AWOL involved and his prior record.

3.  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

FNE    TAP      BJE    DENY APPLICATION

						Loren G. Harrell
						Director