MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:   

	BOARD DATE:           3 November 1999                   
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR1999027355

	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	
	Mrs. Nancy Amos		Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Mr. Fred N. Eichorn		Chairperson	
	Mr. Edwin S. Castle		Member	
	Mr. Stanley Kelley		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 discharge under other than honorable conditions (UOTHC) be upgraded.

APPLICANT STATES:  That he has a steel plate and gout and he needs the upgrade for medical treatment.  

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

He enlisted in the Regular Army on 12 February 1975.

On 26 April 1977, the applicant accepted non-judicial punishment under Article 15, Uniform Code of Military Justice for being absent without leave (AWOL) from 11 – 19 April 1977.  

On 17 August 1977, the applicant departed AWOL.  He was arrested by civil authorities on 18 October 1977 for forfeiting bonds.  He was returned to military control on 18 November 1977.

On 18 November 1977, court-martial charges were preferred against the applicant charging him with AWOL for the period 17 August – 18 November 1977. 

On 23 November 1977, 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 elected not to submit a statement in his own behalf.

On 30 November 1977, the applicant completed a separation physical examination and was found qualified for separation.

On 15 December 1977, the appropriate authority approved the request and directed the applicant receive a discharge UOTHC.

On 13 January 1978, the applicant was discharged with a discharge UOTHC, in pay grade E-1, under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, Chapter 10, discharge in lieu of trial by court-martial.  He had completed 2 years, 7 months and 23 days of creditable active service and had 101 days of lost time. 

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.

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.  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.  The type of discharge given was appropriate considering the length of his AWOL and considering it was his second AWOL in less than one year.  In addition, he was aware at the time that he might be deprived of many or all Army and Veterans Administration benefits.

3.  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

__fne___  __esc___  __sk____  DENY APPLICATION

						Loren G. Harrell
						Director

INDEX

CASE ID	AR1999027355	
SUFFIX		
RECON		
DATE BOARDED	19991103	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE	UOTHC	
DATE OF DISCHARGE	1978/01/13	
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY	AR 635-200, Ch 10 	
DISCHARGE REASON	A70.00	
BOARD DECISION	(DENY)	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.	110.00	
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.