MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:   

	BOARD DATE:           06 January 1999                   
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AC98-12405
                                              AR1998014242

	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. Michael L. Engle		Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Mr. Thomas D. Howard, Jr.		Chairperson	
	Ms. Luther L. Santiful		Member	
	Mr. Curtis W. Barbee		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 be upgraded.

APPLICANT STATES:  That he contends that he should have been given an honorable discharge because he could not support his wife and two children on his military pay.  He states that he went AWOL to get a job.  He was having financial problems and now pleads on his own behalf to the Board for a favorable decision.  In support of his application he submits four letters from friends who knew him during the time he was in the military.

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

He enlisted in the Oklahoma Army National Guard on 11 January 1965 for 6 years.  He completed his initial training and was assigned as an infantryman (11B).

On 18 June 1968 the applicant was ordered to active duty for 17 months and 15 days.  He was assigned as a rifleman with duty at Fort Carson, Colorado.

On 23 November 1968 the applicant pleaded guilty and was convicted by special court-martial of AWOL (14 days).  He was sentenced to 3 months confinement at hard labor, a forfeiture of $50.00 per month for 3 months, and reduction from private E-2 to private E-1.

On 8 April 1969 the applicant pleaded guilty and was convicted by special court-martial of AWOL (11 days).  He was sentenced to confinement at hard labor for 4 months, and reduction from private E-2 to private E-1.

On 12 May 1969 the applicant again went AWOL and was dropped from the Army rolls as a deserter.  He was apprehended by civilian authorities on 9 September 1974 and returned to military control on 11 September 1974.

On 12 September 1974 the applicant was charged with violation of the UCMJ, Article 86, for AWOL (1885 days).

On 17 September 1974 the applicant voluntarily requested to be discharged from the Army for the good of the service under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 10, in lieu of trial by court-martial.

The applicant consulted with counsel, acknowledged the possible effects of receiving an other than honorable discharge, and elected to make a statement in his own behalf.  He stated that he wanted out of the Army so that he could continue working and taking care of his family.

The appropriate authority approved the requested separation on 30 September 1974.  On 3 October 1974 he was discharged under other than honorable conditions.  He completed 8 months and 3 days of creditable active service and had 2000 days lost time due to AWOL and confinement.

There is no evidence that the applicant applied to the Army Discharge Review Board for an upgrade of his discharge within its 15-year statute of limitations.

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 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.

2.  The type of discharge directed and the reason therefor were appropriate considering all the facts of the case.

3.  The applicant’s contention that he only went AWOL because of financial difficulties is not sufficiently mitigating to warrant the requested relief.

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

___X_____  ___X_____  ____X____  DENY APPLICATION

						Loren G. Harrell
						Director