MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:        

	BOARD DATE:            15 December 1999
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR1999022447

	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. Joseph A. Adriance		Analyst	

The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Mr. Thomas N. Kuhn		Chairperson	
	Ms. Elizabeth Buchanon		Member	
	Mr. Mark D. Manning		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 (UD) be upgraded to an honorable discharge (HD) or a general, under honorable conditions discharge (GD).

APPLICANT STATES:  In effect, that he was not given the right to due process.

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

The applicant’s official military record was not available during this review.  However, the evidence included a properly constituted DD Form 214 (Armed Forces of the United States Report of Transfer or Discharge) which documents that the applicant entered the Regular Army on 1 October 1969.

The DD Form 214 shows no acts of valor, significant achievement, or service warranting special recognition.  However, it does include a record of AWOL related misconduct totaling 260 days as follows:  14 April to 4 June 1970; 7 July to 6 August 1970; and 20 December 1970 to 14 June 1971.

The specific circumstances surrounding the applicant’s separation are not on file. However, the properly constituted DD Form 214 issued to and authenticated by the applicant documents the following facts:  Character of Service-Under Other than Honorable Conditions; Type of Discharge Certificate Issued-Undesirable; Authority and Reason for Separation-Chapter 10, AR 635-200 (For The Good of the Service-In Lieu of Trial by Court-Martial).  

The DD Form 214 also indicates that on 1 October 1969, the applicant was issued an Undesirable Discharge after completing 1 year and 28 days of active military service, and having had accrued 260 days of time lost. 

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 are 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 a UD.

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 Board noted the applicant’s contentions that he was not provided due process.  However, the evidence shows that the applicant was discharged under the provisions of Chapter 10, AR 635-200, for the good of the service in lieu of trial by court-martial.  In connection with such a discharge, the applicant was charged with the commission of an offense punishable under the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) with a punitive discharge.  Procedurally, the applicant was required to consult with defense counsel, and to voluntarily, and in writing, request separation from the Army in lieu of trial by court-martial.  

2.  The specific facts and circumstances pertaining to the applicant's discharge are not on file.  However, the evidence of record does include a properly constituted DD Form 214 (Armed Forces of the United States Report of Transfer or Discharge), authenticated by the applicant.  In the absence of information to the contrary, the Board was satisfied that all requirements of law and regulation were met and the rights of the applicant were fully protected throughout the separation process. 

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

__mdm__  ___tnk __  ___eb___  DENY APPLICATION

						Loren G. Harrell
						Director

INDEX

CASE ID	AR1999022447	
SUFFIX		
RECON		
DATE BOARDED	1999/12/15	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE	UD	
DATE OF DISCHARGE	1969/10/1	
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY	AR 635-200, C10	
DISCHARGE REASON	A71.00	
BOARD DECISION	DENY	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.  193	111.0000	
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.