MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:   

	BOARD DATE:            22 August 2000                
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR2000035084

	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	
	Ms. Antoinette E. Farley		Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Mr. Edward Williamson		Chairperson	
	Ms. Margaret V. Thompson		Member	
	Mr. Kenneth W. Lapin		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 (UD) be upgraded to an honorable discharge.

APPLICANT STATES:  In effect, he made a mistake and would like to upgrade his discharge in order to have this reflected on his DD Form 214 (Report of Separation From Active Duty).  This change would allow him to apply for better jobs.  He relies on his service record in support of his application.

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

On 8 February 1974, he enlisted in the Regular Army for 3 years.  He completed his basic combat training at Fort Knox, Kentucky.  On 31 May 1974, he was transferred to Fort Polk, Louisiana for advanced individual training in military occupational specialty (MOS) 111.00 (Light Weapons Infantryman).  He was then assigned for parachute training at Fort Benning, Georgia and awarded a parachute badge on 
17 June 1974.  He then was assigned to Fort Bragg, North Carolina for duty as an Infantryman.

On 21 August 1974, he received a nonjudicial punishment (NJP) under Article 15, Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ), for sleeping while posted as a sentinel on 16 August 1974.  His punishment included reduction to the rank of private, pay grade E-1, 14 days of extra duty, suspended for 30 days. 

On 15 January 1975, he received a NJP for being absent without authorization (AWOL) from Company B, 82nd Aviation Battalion, located at Fort Bragg, on
6 January 1975.  His punishment included reduction to the rank of private, pay grade E-1, suspended for 60 days and to be placed in correctional custody for 
7 days.

On 18 February 1975, he was attached to the US Army Quartermaster School, for training and award of MOS 76W (Petroleum Storage Specialist), at Fort Lee, Virginia.

On 23 April 1975, he was returned to Fort Bragg, and his MOS of 11B1P was redesignated his secondary MOS. 

On 15 August 1975, he received his third NJP, for disobeying a lawful order and using disruptive language to two superior noncommissioned officers.  On the same day, he was also charged with causing a fistfight and using indecent language.  His punishment included reduction in rank and correctional custody for 14 days. 

On 13 July 1976, the applicant was charged with two specification of violation of Article 134, UCMJ, by wrongfully having in his possession two (2) ounces, more or less, of marijuana on 4 May 1976 and wrongfully selling 2 ounces, more or less, of marijuana on the same date. 

On or about 2 August 1976, the applicant consulted with legal counsel, and voluntarily requested discharge under the provisions of chapter 10, Army Regulation AR 635-200, for the good of the service in lieu of trial by court-martial. He did not submit a statement in his own behalf.  

On 9 August 1976, the applicant received a medical and mental status evaluation and was cleared for separation.

On 10 August 1976, his unit and intermediate commanders recommended approval of the separation action with a UD.  On 17 August 1976, he was voluntarily placed on excess leave pending administrative discharge.

On 27 August 1976, the separation authority approved the applicant’s separation with a UD.  On 17 September 1976, he was discharged under the provisions of chapter 10, Army Regulation 635-200, for the good of the service in lieu of trial by court-martial, with a UD.  He had 2 years, 7 months and 10 days of creditable service to include 32 days of excess leave, and no lost time.  The highest pay grade he attained was E-3.

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 a UD discharge.

The applicant sought a discharge upgraded through the Army Discharge Review Board (ADRB).  After a thorough review, the ADRB denied his request on 
4 February 1983.

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 this 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. 

3.  Therefore, the type of discharge directed and the reason for discharge was appropriate considering the facts of the case.

4.  Further, the applicant’s prior acts of misconduct provide no bases for the Board to grant relief in his case based on his overall record of service.

5.  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

__ew____  __mvt___  __kwl ____DENY APPLICATION

Carl W. S. Chun
Director, Army Boards for Correction
of military Records

INDEX

CASE ID	AR200035084	
SUFFIX		
RECON		
DATE BOARDED	20000822	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE	UD	
DATE OF DISCHARGE	19760917	
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY	AR 635-200	
DISCHARGE REASON	A70.00	
BOARD DECISION	DENY	
REVIEW AUTHORITY	DIRECTOR	
ISSUES         1.	A67.50	
2.	A74.00	
3.	A71.00	
4.	A39.00	
5.		
6.