MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:   

	BOARD DATE:  23 March 2000
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR1999029082

	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. Vic Whitney		Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Ms. Shirley Powell		Chairperson	
	Mr. James E. Anderholm		Member	
	Mr. Roger W. Able		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 be upgraded.

APPLICANT STATES:  In an attached statement he requests consideration because he was young and foolish.  He has been a law-abiding citizen and a loyal patriot for many years and would like to clear his name.

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

He enlisted and entered active duty on 17 September 1980.  He completed supply and basic airborne training and was assigned to Fort Bragg on 20 February 1981.

While attending armorer school he was AWOL for 15 days and was punished under Article 15, UCMJ.  He was again AWOL for 1 day in July 1981 and was punished under Article 15, UCMJ.  From 2 March to 23 May 1983 he was either AWOL, confined by civil authorities, or confined by military authorities.  It also appears that he had used a stolen bankcard, overdrew his bank account, and failed to pay a fine for driving while intoxicated.

Charges were preferred for the AWOL offenses and on 27 May 1983, after consultation with counsel, he requested discharge for the good of the service in lieu of trial by court-martial.  In his request he acknowledged that he was guilty of the AWOL offenses and may receive a discharge under other than honorable conditions.  The separation authority, a major general, approved the request and directed separation in grade E-1 under other than honorable conditions.

The applicant was discharge on 17 June 1983 under other than honorable conditions with 2 years, 6 months, and 1 day creditable service and 92 days lost time.

There is no evidence of record to show that the applicant applied to the Army Discharge Review Board for a review of his discharge within the 15 year time limit established for that purpose.

Information provided by the FBI shows that he has been arrested and convicted of criminal charges such as interstate transportation of explosives, possession of marijuana with the intent to deliver, and most recently in November 1999 was charged with violation of resisting order.

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.  The applicant's request for a chapter 10 discharge, even after appropriate and proper consultation with a military lawyer, tends to show he wished to avoid the court-martial and the punitive discharge that he might have received.  The applicant's administrative separation was accomplished in compliance with applicable regulations with no indication of procedural errors which would tend to jeopardize his rights.

2.  The applicant's contention that he was young and immature at the time is not sufficiently mitigating to warrant relief.  The Board notes that the applicant was almost 21 years of age at the time of his extended AWOL.  Additionally, his claim of being a law-abiding citizen for many years is without credibility.

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

__SP__  __JA__  __RA___  DENY APPLICATION

						Karl F. Schneider
				     Director, Army Review Boards Agency

INDEX

CASE ID	AR1999029082	
SUFFIX		
RECON		
DATE BOARDED	20000323	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE	UOTHC	
DATE OF DISCHARGE	19830617	
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY	AR 635-200, Ch 10	
DISCHARGE REASON	A71.00	
BOARD DECISION	DENY	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.	110.02	
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.