MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:   

	BOARD DATE:           9 March 2000
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR1999026398

	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. David H. Keller		Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Ms. June Hajjar 		Chairperson	
	Mr. Thomas D. Howard Jr.		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 undesirable discharge be upgraded to general under honorable conditions.  

APPLICANT STATES:  That he went in the service after his mother had gone through 3 years of suffering with cancer and then died.  The service was fair to him, he just wasn’t emotionally ready for the responsibility that came with becoming a man at the time.  It took him a lot of years to overcome the emotional scars that his mother’s illness left with him.  However, now that he has, he would like his discharge changed so that he may be a part of the American Legion family.  In support of his request, he submits two character references from his local American Legion 1st Vice Commander and Service Officer.

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

He enlisted on 7 February 1972 for a period of 3 years.  Although he completed basic training, he failed to complete advanced individual training due to AWOL.

On 16 March 1972, while in basic training, the applicant was administered nonjudicial punishment under Article 15, UCMJ, for AWOL from 13 March to 
16 March 1972.

On 26 June 1972, the applicant was tried by summary court-martial and found guilty of AWOL from 15 May to 30 May 1972.  He was sentenced to extra duty for 15 days and forfeiture of $192.00.

On 22 August 1972. The applicant was tried by special court-martial and found guilty of AWOL from 30 June 1972 to 11 July 1972.  He was sentenced to hard labor without confinement for 3 weeks, forfeiture of $100.00, and restriction to his company area for 3 weeks.

The facts and circumstances pertaining to the applicant’s discharge are not on file.  The Report of Transfer or Discharge, DD Form 214, indicates that he was discharged on 26 April 1973 for the good of the service under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 10, in lieu of trial by court-martial, and was issued an Undesirable Discharge Certificate.  In the absence of evidence to the contrary, it is presumed that the discharge proceedings were conducted in accordance with law and regulations applicable at the time.

The applicant was discharged at Fort Lewis, Washington, with 8 months and 
14 days of creditable service and 186 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 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.

There is no evidence that the applicant applied to the Army Discharge Review Board for upgrade of his discharge within its 15-year statute of limitations.

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, was administratively correct and in conformance with applicable regulations.  This Board also presumes administrative regularity in the processing of the applicant’s discharge.  There is nothing in the available records or in anything submitted by the applicant to overcome that presumption.

2.  The applicant's request for a chapter 10 discharge 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

__jh____  ___tdh___  __cjs____  DENY APPLICATION

						Karl F. Schneider
						Director, Army Review Boards Agency

INDEX

CASE ID	AR1999026398	
SUFFIX		
RECON		
DATE BOARDED	20000309	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE	UD	
DATE OF DISCHARGE	19730426	
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY	AR635-200 CH10	
DISCHARGE REASON	A71.00	
BOARD DECISION	DENY	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.	110.00	
2.	142.00	
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.