MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:   

	BOARD DATE:           16 December 1999                   
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR1999027827

	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. Joyce A. Hughes		Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Mr. Fred K. McCoy		Chairperson	
	Mr. Raymond V. O’Connor, Jr.		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:  In effect, that his discharge under other than honorable conditions be upgraded.

APPLICANT STATES:  He makes no statement.

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

He was born on 18 January 1952.  He completed 9 years of formal education.
The applicant enlisted in the Regular Army on 3 November 1969, for 3 years with no prior service.

On 31 July 1970, the applicant accepted nonjudical punishment under Article 15, Uniform Code of Military Justice (NJP) for being absent without leave (AWOL) from 2 to 29 July 1970.  His imposed punishment was a forfeiture of $50.00 pay per month for 2 months, restriction for 20 days, extra duty for 30 days and reduction to pay grade E-2.  Forfeiture of $50.00 per month for 2 months is suspended the second month for thirty days at which time, if suspension is not sooner vacated, the suspended portion of the punishment will be remitted without further action.

On 3 November 1971, court martial charges were preferred against the applicant 
for being AWOL from 4 November 1970 to 19 July 1971 and from 30 July to 21 October 1971.

On 16 November 1971, the applicant consulted with legal counsel and 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 submitted a statement in his behalf.  The applicant states in effect, after he completed his training he was sent to Ft. Hood,TX., whereupon he went AWOL.  His brother was home on leave and he had not seen him for over a year. He asked for leave but was denied, some friends of his were on their way to Arkansas so he decided to go with them.  He stayed AWOL for 26 days before being apprehended.  He accepted punishment for that offense.  Everything was going okay until he was jumped by some colored guys for no reason at all, he reported the incident but nothing was done so he went AWOL again staying away for 8 months during that period he was married.  He decided to turn himself in and get a discharge. He was taken to Ft. Leonard he stayed there for about 10 days nothing was done about discharging him so he went AWOL again.  He remained AWOL for 3 months before being apprehended.  He further states that he had a lot of personal problems at home. He just couldn’t and wouldn’t do the army any good, he just want to be out of the Army and to get back with his family.

A mental and a physical evaluation found the applicant fit for retention.

On 18 December 1971, the appropriate authority approved the applicant’s request for discharge and directed the issuance of a discharge UOTHC.  On 
14 January 1972, 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. 

Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority of the separation of enlisted personnel.  Chapter 10 of that regulation provided, 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 trail by court.  A discharge UOTHC is normally considered appropriate.

On 15 January 1982, the Army Discharge Review Board (ADRB) denied the applicant’s request for an upgrade.

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 provision 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 type of discharge and the reasons therefore were appropriate considering all the facts of the case.

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

__fkm___  __rvo___  __sk____  DENY APPLICATION

						Loren G. Harrell
						Director

INDEX

CASE ID	AR1999027827	
SUFFIX		
RECON		
DATE BOARDED	19991216	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE	UOTHC	
DATE OF DISCHARGE	19720114	
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY	AR635-200, chap 10	
DISCHARGE REASON	A70.00	
BOARD DECISION	DENY	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.	144.7000	
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.