MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:        

	BOARD DATE:            15 December 1999
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR1999024016

	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 under other than honorable conditions (UOHC) discharge be upgraded to an honorable discharge (HD).

APPLICANT STATES:  In effect, that he was never AWOL but was instead waiting for a medical board to give him a medical discharge based on a disability resulting from his right hip.  

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

On 19 June 1997, the applicant enlisted in the Regular Army for 4 years.  He completed basic training at Fort Gordon, Georgia and remained there to attend advanced individual training (AIT) in military occupational specialty (MOS) 31U.

On 4 February 1998, while still in AIT, the applicant went AWOL from his unit at Fort Gordon and remained away until he surrendered to military authorities at Fort Gordon on 7 April 1998.  At this time the applicant was assigned to the Special Processing Company of the Personnel Control Facility, at Fort Knox, Kentucky.

The evidence of record indicates that on 13 April 1998, a DD Form 458 
(Charge Sheet) was prepared preferring a court-martial charge against the applicant for violation of Article 86 of the UCMJ, for the period of AWOL referred to in the preceding paragraph and the applicant voluntarily requested discharge for the good of the service, under the provisions of chapter 10 of AR 635-200.  

Prior to submitting his request for discharge the applicant consulted counsel and was advised of the basis for his contemplated trial by court-martial, the maximum permissible punishment, and of the possible effects of a UOHC discharge.  In his request, the applicant stated that he understood the elements of the offense for which he was charged and that he was guilty of the charge or of a lesser included offense.  In addition, he attested to the fact that he fully understood he would be deprived of many or all Army benefits, that he may be ineligible for many or all benefits administered by the VA, and that he may be deprived of veterans benefits under state and federal law.  Further, he verified that he was making the request of his own free will and that he had not been subjected to any coercion whatsoever by any person.  Finally, when offered the opportunity, the applicant declined to submit a statement in his own behalf.  The record shows no reference to a medical condition being addressed through medical channels being raised by the applicant during the discharge process.  

On 21 August 1998, the appropriate authority approved the applicant’s request for discharge and directed that he receive a UOHC discharge and that he be reduced to the lowest enlisted rank.  Accordingly, on 14 October 1998, the applicant was discharged after completing 1 year, 1 month, and 24 days of creditable active military service and having had accrued 62 days of time lost due to AWOL.
 
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 for soldiers separating under this chapter. 

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 contention that he was waiting for a medical discharge based on a disability.  However, this claim is not supported by either the evidence of record or the independent evidence submitted by the applicant. 

2.  The evidence of record shows the applicant was charged with the commission of an offense punishable under the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) with a punitive discharge.  The Board noted that, after consulting with defense counsel, the applicant voluntarily, and in writing, requested separation from the Army in lieu of trial by court-martial.  In doing so, the applicant admitted guilt to the stipulated offenses under the UCMJ.  

3.  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.  It also noted that the characterization of service for this type of discharge is normally under other than honorable conditions and that the applicant was aware of that prior to requesting discharge. 

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

__mdm __  __tnk ___  __eb____  DENY APPLICATION

						Loren G. Harrell
						Director

INDEX

CASE ID	AR1999024016	
SUFFIX		
RECON		
DATE BOARDED	1999/12/15	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE	UOTHC	
DATE OF DISCHARGE	1998/10/14	
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY	AR 635-200, C10	
DISCHARGE REASON	A71.00	
BOARD DECISION	DENY	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.  189	110.0000	
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.