MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:   

	BOARD DATE:           27 January 2000                             
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR1999025992

	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.

	Mrs. Judy Blanchard-Miller		Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Ms. Irene N. Wheelwright		Chairperson	
	Mr. Stanley Kelley		Member	
	Mr. Elzey J. Arledge, Jr.		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 he would like his records to reflect an upgrade that is more favorable.

APPLICANT STATES:  In effect, he was not only young but also naive.

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

On 22 February 1983, the applicant enlisted in the Regular Army for 3 years.  The applicant successfully completed the required training and was awarded military occupational specialty 76Y10 (Unit Supply Specialist).  The highest grade he achieved was pay grade E-4.

On 12 March 1984, court-martial charges were preferred against the applicant for committing an assault upon a dependent of a US Army service member, a child under the age of 16 years old (the child was 3 1/2 years old at the time of the assault), by striking and kicking the child on the head, face, neck, hips and back, and by pulling hair from his head, all with the a means likely to produce grievous bodily harm.

On 26 March 1984, an Article 32 Investigation was conducted to investigate the facts and circumstances concerning charges preferred against the applicant. After an intensive investigation, it was determined that there was enough evidence that established a prima facie case.  The investigating officer recommended that the applicant be referred to trial by General courts-martial.  On 6 April 1984, the Staff Judge Advocate approved the recommendation and referred the applicant to trial by General courts-martial.

On 11 April 1984, after consulting with legal counsel the applicant voluntarily requested a discharge under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 10, for the good of the service in lieu of trial by court-martial.  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 Veterans Administration benefits.  He was afforded the opportunity to submit statements in his behalf, but declined to do so.  The company commander recommended disapproval of the applicant’s request because of the seriousness of the offense. 

However, on the same day the appropriate authority approved the applicant’s request for discharge.  Directed that the applicant be discharged from service in the most expeditious manner possible and that he be issued an Under Other Than Honorable Conditions Discharge Certificate.  The applicant did not request a medical examination.  On 19 April 1984, the applicant was discharged, in pay grade E-1, under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 10, for the good of service with a discharge UOTHC.  

He had completed 1 year, 1 month and 28 days of creditable active service. 

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, and advisory opinion(s), it is concluded:

1.  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.

2.  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.  There is no indication that the request was made under coercion or duress.

3.  The applicant's contention that he was young and naive at the time is not sufficiently mitigating to warrant relief. 

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

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

__inw___  __sk____  __eja___  DENY APPLICATION

Karl F. Schneider
Director, Army Review Boards Agency

INDEX

CASE ID	AR1999025992	
SUFFIX		
RECON		
DATE BOARDED	20000127	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE	(UOTHC)	
DATE OF DISCHARGE	19840419	
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY	AR635-200-chp10 .  .  .  .  .  	
DISCHARGE REASON	A70.00	
BOARD DECISION	(DENY)	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.	144.7000	
2. 144.7100		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.