MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:        

	BOARD DATE:            15 September 1999                  
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR1999018153

	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 Deyon D. Battle		Analyst	

The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Mr. James M. Alward		Chairperson	
	Mr. Ted S. Kanamine		Member	
	Ms. Kathleen A. Newman		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 be upgraded to a general discharge.

APPLICANT STATES:  That he had to go AWOL because he could not afford to stay in the Army.  He further states, in effect that he was a married man with 3 children while he was in the Army and his records show why he had to go AWOL.

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

On 18 February 1981, he enlisted in the Army for 3 years in the pay grade of 
E-1.  He successfully completed his training as a light vehicle and power generator mechanic.  On 18 August 1981, he was promoted to the pay grade of E-2.

Charges were preferred against the applicant on 17 February 1982.  He was charged with being AWOL from 3 September 1981 until 4 February 1982.  He was notified of the pending charges and on 18 February 1982, after consulting with counsel, he submitted a request for discharge under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 10 for the good of the service in lieu of trial by court-martial.  Along with his request for discharge he submitted a statement in his own behalf indicating that he went AWOL because he could not afford to support his family with the money that the Army was paying him.  He further stated that he was told during his basic training that he would be able to take out a loan once he reported to his permanent station.  However when he got there he was told that there was nothing that could be done and he needed to pay his bills.

The request for discharge was approved by the appropriate authority on 25 February 1982.  Accordingly, on 17 March 1982, he was discharged under other than honorable conditions for misconduct, under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 10 for the good of the service in lieu of trial by court-martial.  He had completed 8 months and 25 days of total active service and he had a total of 155 days of lost time due to AWOL.

There is no evidence that the applicant ever applied to the Army Discharge Review Board for an upgrade of his discharge.

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 submit a request for discharge for the good of the service in lieu of trial by court-martial.  The request may be submitted at any time after charges have been preferred and must include the individual's admission of guilt.  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 actions by the Army in this case were proper, and there is no doubt to be resolved in favor of the applicant.

2.  The character of his discharge is commensurate with his overall record of service.

3.  The applicant’s contentions have been noted by the Board.  In the statement he submitted in his own behalf at the time of his discharge, he indicated that he could not afford to pay his bills with the amount of money he was receiving in the Army.  However, any personal problems that he may have been having were not then, nor would the now be, a sufficient basis going AWOL.  Moreover, there is no evidence of record to show that he sought financial assistance for any money problems he might have been experiencing. 

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

___ja ___  ___tsk __  __kan ___  DENY APPLICATION

						Loren G. Harrell
						Director

INDEX

CASE ID	AR1999018153	
SUFFIX		
RECON		
DATE BOARDED	1999/09/15	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE	UOTHC	
DATE OF DISCHARGE	1982/03/17	
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY	AR 635-200	
DISCHARGE REASON	689	
BOARD DECISION	DENY	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.  708	A71.00/144.7100	
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.