MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:   

	BOARD DATE:           24 November 1998                   
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AC98-11405

	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. George D. Paxson		Chairperson	
	Ms. Celia L. Adolphi		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:  That his discharge under other than honorable conditions (UOTHC) be upgraded to an honorable discharge.

APPLICANT STATES:  He was told that after going absent without leave (AWOL) he would be given an honorable discharge since he had less than         8 months left on his enlistment.

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

On 23 February 1973, he enlisted in the Regular Army for 2 years.  He completed basic training and advanced individual training and was awarded military occupational specialty 63B (Wheel Vehicle Mechanic).

The applicant was in civil confinement from 1 May - 13 June 1972 for possession of drugs.  The disposition of that arrest is not known.

On 12 September 1972, a board of officers convened to determine if he should be eliminated from the service under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-206 for misconduct.  On 18 September 1972, the board recommended his retention.  The entire packet of this action is not available.

On 13 October 1972, the applicant was assigned to Germany.

On 10 January 1974, court-martial charges were preferred against the applicant charging him with AWOL for the period 8 June 1973 - 4 January 1974.

On 10 January 1974, the applicant completed a separation physical and was found qualified for separation.

On 11 January 1974, 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.  (He completed             pre-printed statements:  …“I hate the ____ Army” and …“I know I will receive an undesirable discharge and louse (sic) most of my benefits.”)

On 8 February 1974, the appropriate authority approved the request and directed the applicant receive an undesirable discharge.

The applicant’s DD Form 214 is not available.  Separation orders show he was discharged effective 18 March 1974, with a discharge UOTHC, in pay grade E-1 for the good of the service.  He had completed approximately 1 year and            4 months of creditable active service and had 253 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.

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

GDP    CLA      RWG    DENY APPLICATION

						Loren G. Harrell
						Director