MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:      

	BOARD DATE:            29 April 1999                  
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR1999023377

	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. Ann M. Campbell		Chairperson	
	Mr. Edwin S. Castle		Member	
	Mr. Christopher J. Prosser		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 undesirable discharge be upgraded to a general discharge.

APPLICANT STATES:  That he does not understand the entry “Benefits of Honorable Discharge” in item 25 of his DD Form 214 (Armed Forces of the United States Report of Transfer or Discharge).  He also states that he has been denied all benefits that are entitled to him, i.e., medical.  In support of his application he submits a copy of a letter from his minister, a copy of his Standard Form 600 (Chronological Record of Medical Care) and a copy of his Standard Form 88 (Report of Medical Examination).

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

The applicant was inducted on 22 September 1969 as a supply clerk.

On 13 March 1970, nonjudicial punishment was imposed against the applicant for being AWOL from 2 February 1970 to 5 February 1970.

Charges were preferred against the applicant on 23 July 1971 for being AWOL from 6 April 1970 to 20 July 1970.

On 10 August 1971, he consulted with counsel and voluntarily requested discharge for the good of the service in lieu of trial by court-martial, under the provisions of AR 635-200, chapter 10.  In doing so, he admitted guilt to the offense charged and acknowledged that he might encounter substantial prejudice in civilian life and might be ineligible for many or all benefits administered by the Veterans Administration (VA) if a discharge under other than honorable conditions were issued.  The applicant also elected not to submit a statement in his own behalf.

The applicant underwent a separation medical examination on 16 August 1971 and was found qualified for separation.

On 19 August 1971, the separation authority approved the applicant’s request for discharge and directed that he be furnished an Undesirable Discharge Certificate.  The applicant was discharged on 3 September 1971.  He had a total of 7 months, and 28 days of creditable service and 472 days of lost time due to AWOL.

The applicant’s DA Form 20 (Enlisted Qualification Record) item 28 (SPECIALIZED TRAINING) shows that he completed training in UCMJ (Uniform Code of Military Justice) and Benefits of Honorable Discharge on 26 September 1969, Code of Conduct on 2 October 1969 and ATP (Army Training Program) 21-114 on 21 November 1969.  Likewise, these courses are listed in item 25 of his DD Form 214.
The applicant applied to the Army Discharge Review Board (ADRB) for an upgrade of his discharge on 19 August 1975.  He elected to appeared before an 
ADRB Panel on 21 September 1976 in Fort Benjamin Harrison, Indiana.  He also elected to testify in his own in his own behalf and was represented by counsel from the American Legion.  On 3 January 1977, the ADRB determined that he was properly discharged and denied his request.

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.

Army Regulation 635-5 governs the preparation of the DD Form 214.  It states in pertinent part that item 25 will be completed to show service schools, including major courses which were successfully completed, military sponsored courses completed in civilian schools and colleges, installation training courses (qualification courses), military correspondence courses, and off-duty courses the enlisted person has completed successfully during the period covered by the 
DD Form 214.  This entry includes the highest civilian education level acquired during this period of military service, if 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 Board noted the applicant’s contentions that he does not understand the entry “Benefits of Honorable Discharge” in item 25 of his DD Form 214.  The applicant’s personnel records clearly show that he completed training on Benefits of Honorable Discharge on 26 September 1969.  Therefore, there is no basis to correct item 25 of his DD Form 214.

2.  The applicant was advised of the effects of a discharge under other than honorable conditions and that he might be deprived of many or all Army and VA benefits.

3.  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.  

4.  The type of discharge directed and the reasons therefore were appropriate considering all of the facts of the case.

5.  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.

6.  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

AMC____  ESC____  CJP_____  DENY APPLICATION

						Loren G. Harrell
						Director

INDEX

CASE ID	AR1999023377	
SUFFIX		
RECON	YYYYMMDD	
DATE BOARDED	19990429	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE	UD	
DATE OF DISCHARGE	19710903	
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY	AR 635-200	
DISCHARGE REASON		
BOARD DECISION	DENY 	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1. 110		
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.