MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:   

	BOARD DATE:            9 February 2000                  
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR1999022333

	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. Leland A. Edwards		Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Mr. Raymond V. O’Connor Jr.		Chairperson	
	Ms. Deborah S. Jacobs 		Member	
	Ms. Carol Jo Suiter 		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 honorable or at least general. 

APPLICANT STATES:  The applicant states that he has been subjected to prejudice for over 15 years as a result of his discharge.  He believes that it has been long enough for one to suffer as a result of their action so long ago.  He also states that he admitted the error of his ways long ago and as a result of his mistake he has missed out on many opportunities.  He states that since that time he has been a model citizen with no criminal record, felony or misdemeanor. 

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

He enlisted on 22 February 1982 for a period of 4 years and was assigned to Fort Stewart, Georgia.

On 18 May 1984, during a permanent change of duty station transition from Fort Stewart to the Federal Republic of Germany, the applicant failed to report on the prescribed reporting date to the Military Airlift Command in Charleston Air Force Base, South Carolina, for transportation to Germany.

On 14 August 1984, the applicant surrendered to military authorities at Fort Knox, Kentucky.

On 17 August 1984, the applicant signed a statement, Subject: Admission of AWOL for Administrative Purpose.  He was charged with being AWOL for the period 18 May 1984 to 14 August 1984.

On 20 August 1984 after having been advised by counsel, the applicant requested that he be discharged for the good of the service under the provisions of Chapter 10, AR 635-200, in lieu of a trail by court-martial.   

On 30 August 1984, the separation authority, a Major General, approved the applicant’s request to be discharged and directed separation under other than honorable conditions.

The applicant was discharged on 24 September 1984.  He had 2 years 4 months and 7 days creditable service, and 88 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 and 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 trail by court-martial.  A discharge under other than honorable conditions is normally considered appropriate.   

The applicant applied to the Army Discharge Review Board for upgrade of his discharge on 27 September 1986 and was denied.  The Board found the applicant’s discharged was proper and equitable.
 
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, is presumed to be administratively correct and in conformance with applicable regulations.  There is no indication that the request was made under coercion or duress.

2.  The applicant’s request for a chapter 10 discharge, even after appropriate and proper consultation with a military lawyer, tends to show he wished to avoid the court-martial and the punitive discharge that he might have received.

3.  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.     

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

__RVO__  __DSJ___  __CJS__  DENY APPLICATION

						Karl F. Schneider
						Director, Army Review Boards Agency

INDEX

CASE ID	AR1999022333	
SUFFIX		
RECON		
DATE BOARDED	20000209	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE	UOTHC	
DATE OF DISCHARGE	1984/09/24	
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY	AR 635-200 CH 10  	
DISCHARGE REASON		
BOARD DECISION	 DENY	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.110		
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.