MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:        

	BOARD DATE:              22 April 1999
	DOCKET NUMBER:     AC9811186
                                                AR1999014927

	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:

	Ms. Irene N. Wheelwright		Chairperson	
	Ms. Elizabeth Buchanon		Member	
	Mr. Thomas A. Pagan		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 undesirable discharge be upgraded to an honorable discharge.

APPLICANT STATES:  In effect, that he voluntarily jeopardized his life to fight for his country during the Vietnam era and now believes that he deserves 100% disability due to his service and needs assistance.  He also states that he served in the infantry and not in the kitchen.

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

The applicant entered active duty on 24 October 1966 as a heavy vehicle driver. 

On 27 August 1969, nonjudicial punishment was imposed against the applicant for being AWOL from 2 June 1969 to 22 July 1969.  His punishment consisted of a reduction to the pay grade of E-1, forfeiture of pay and 60 days restriction.

He was convicted by a special court-martial on 8 June 1967 for larceny.  His sentence consisted of a forfeiture of pay.

The facts and circumstances pertaining to the applicant’s discharge are not present in the available records.  However, his DD Form 214 shows that on 20 May 1974, he was discharged under the provisions of Army Regulation
635-200, chapter 10, in lieu of trial by court-martial.  He had served 4 years,
4 months, 4 days of creditable service and had 51 days of lost time due to AWOL and prior to his scheduled expiration term of service (ETS) and 1,562 days of lost time due to AWOL subsequent to his normal ETS.

The applicant applied to the Army Discharge Review Board (ADRB) for an upgrade of his discharge on 13 May 1975.  The ADRB determined that he was properly discharge and denied his request on 27 February 1976.

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.  A discharge under other than honorable conditions is normally considered appropriate.  However, at the time of the applicant’s separation the regulation provided for the issuance of an undesirable
discharge.

DISCUSSION:  Considering all the evidence, allegations, and information presented by the applicant, together with the evidence of record, applicable law and regulations, and advisory opinion(s), it is concluded:

1.  The Board noted the applicant’s contentions that he voluntarily jeopardized his life to fight for his country and that he deserves 100% disability due to his service; however, there is no evidence in the available records to support his contentions.  

2.  In the absence of evidence to the contrary, it must be presumed that the applicant’s administrative separation was accomplished in compliance with applicable regulations with no procedural errors which would tend to jeopardize his rights.

3.  The type of separation directed and the reasons therefor appear to be appropriate considering all of the facts of the case.

4.  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

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

INW_____  EB_____  TAP_____  DENY APPLICATION

						Loren G. Harrell
						Director

INDEX

CASE ID	AR1999014927	
SUFFIX		
RECON	YYYYMMDD	
DATE BOARDED	19990422	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE	UD	
DATE OF DISCHARGE	19740520	
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY	AR 635-200	
DISCHARGE REASON		
BOARD DECISION	DENY	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.110		
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.