MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:   

	BOARD DATE:            25 May 2000                 
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR1999028359

	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. Carl W. S. Chun		Director	
	Mr. David H. Keller		Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Mr. Elzey J. Arledge Jr. 		Chairperson	
	Mr. Ernest W. Lutz Jr. 		Member	
	Mr. Kenneth L. Wright 		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 be upgraded to honorable.

APPLICANT STATES:  In effect, that he was not AWOL, but held in Egypt against his will after going to the United States Embassy in Cairo in order to renew his passport.  He adds that as a Muslim and a mechanical engineer, he was forced to serve in a public factory.  He states that he had no intention of leaving the Army and wishes that he had never gone back to Egypt.  In support of his application, he submits a copy of orders assigning him to Germany; a photograph of himself in uniform; a DA Form 3686, Leave and Earning Statement, for February 1976, and a copy of his DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge.

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

He enlisted on 28 March 1972 and was honorably discharged on 5 August 1974 for the purpose of immediate reenlistment.  In March 1976, he was assigned to a unit in Germany.

On 15 July 1976, the applicant was reported AWOL from an ordinary leave status.  He was dropped from his unit’s rolls as a deserter on 13 August 1976.  His service record and allied documents were transferred to the US Army Enlisted Records and Evaluation Center on 3 September 1976.

The facts and circumstances pertaining to the applicant’s discharge are not on file.  His DD Form 214 indicates that he was separated in absentia on 21 March 1983 by reason of misconduct under the provisions of chapter 14, Army Regulation 635-200; he was issued an under other than honorable conditions (UOTHC) discharge.  He had 4 years, 3 months, and 17 days of creditable active Federal service and 2,537 days of lost time.

Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel.  It states that an honorable discharge is a separation with honor and is appropriate when the quality of the soldier’s service is so meritorious that any other characterization would be clearly inappropriate.  Chapter 14 establishes policy and prescribes procedures for separating soldiers for misconduct.  Specific categories include minor disciplinary infractions, a pattern of misconduct, commission of a serious offense, convictions by civil authorities, desertion, or AWOL.  Action will be taken to separate a soldier for misconduct when it is clearly established that rehabilitation is impracticable or is unlikely to succeed.

There is no evidence that the applicant applied to the Army Discharge Review Board for upgrade of his discharge within that board’s 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.  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 has provided no evidence to support his contention that he was being held in Egypt against his will.

3.  In the absence of facts and circumstances, the Board presumes administrative regularity in the processing of the applicant’s discharge.  There is nothing in the available records, or anything submitted by the applicant, to overcome that presumption.  It would appear that his administrative separation was accomplished in compliance with applicable regulations, with no indication of procedural errors that would tend to jeopardize his rights.

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

________  ________  ________  DENY APPLICATION

		    Carl W. S. Chun
		    Director, Army Board for Correction
    of Military Records

INDEX

CASE ID	AR1999028359	
SUFFIX		
RECON	 	
DATE BOARDED	20000525	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE		
DATE OF DISCHARGE		
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY		
DISCHARGE REASON		
BOARD DECISION	DENY	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.	110.00	
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.