PROCEEDINGS

	IN THE CASE OF:       

	BOARD DATE:           12 April 2000
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR2000036681

	I certify that hereinafter is recorded the true and complete record of the proceedings of the Army Board for Correction of Military Records in the case of the above-named individual.  

	Ms. McKim-Spilker		Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Mr. Robert G. Hinkle		Chairperson	
	Ms. Barbara J. Ellis		Member	
	Mr. James P. Stueve		Member	

	The applicant and counsel if any, did not appear before the Board.

	The Board considered the following evidence:

	Exhibit A - Application for correction of military 
                            records
	Exhibit B - Military Personnel Records (including
	                 advisory opinion, if any)

FINDINGS:

1.  The applicant has exhausted or the Board has waived the requirement for exhaustion of all administrative remedies afforded by existing law or regulations.

2.  The applicant requests, in effect, that his discharge under other than honorable conditions (UOHC) be upgraded to general, under honorable conditions (GD).

3.  He states, in effect, that he was told that after 8 years he could have his discharge upgraded to at least a GD; and, that he has paid for the mistakes he made when he was younger.

4.  The applicant’s military records show that on 21 October 1977 he enlisted in the Regular Army (RA) for a period of 3 years unassigned.  He successfully completed basic combat training at Fort Dix, New Jersey, and advanced individual training (AIT) at Fort Belvoir, Virginia.  Upon completion of AIT he was awarded military occupational specialty (MOS) 52B (Power Generator Equipment Repairer), and assigned to Fort Ord, California. 

5.  On 28 November 1980, at Fort Knox, Kentucky, he was honorably discharged for the purpose of immediate reenlistment.  On 29 November 1980 he reenlisted in the RA for a period of 3 years and for assignment to Korea.  At the time of his reenlistment he held the rank of specialist/E-4 and had completed 3 years, 1 month, and 7 days of prior active honorable service.  It appears that the applicant extended his initial enlistment for the purpose of processing his reenlistment.

6.  On 11 May 1982 he accepted an NJP for failing to go to morning formation.  The punishment imposed consisted of forfeiture of $50.

7.  On 1 December 1982 he departed Korea in casual status en route to Ft. Knox, Kentucky.

8.  On 1 June 1983 he departed AWOL and remained absent until 26 July 1983.

9.  On 28 July 1983 he was charged with AWOL. The applicant acknowledged notification of the charges, and after legal consultation, he requested discharge in lieu of court-martial under the provisions of Chapter 10, AR 635-200.  

10.  On 11 August 1983 the appropriate authority approved his discharge and ordered him separated with an UOHC.  Accordingly, on 1 September 1983 the applicant was discharged after completing 5 years, 7 months, and 8 days of active military service. 

11.  Army Regulation 635-200, then in effect, sets forth 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. 

12.  There is no evidence that the applicant applied to the Army Discharge Review Board for upgrade of his discharge within its 15-year statute of limitations.

CONCLUSIONS:

1.  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.

2.  The overall quality of the applicant’s last period of service does not warrant an upgrade of the discharge.  However, his prior term of service, which included 3 years, 1 month, and 7 days of honorable service, should be considered a complete and unconditional separation. 

3.  Although the applicant was not eligible for a complete and unconditional separation on 28 November 1980, the honorable discharge issued to him for the purpose of immediate reenlistment terminated a period covering more than 3 years of honorable service.

4.  In consideration of the foregoing findings and conclusions, and in recognition of his more than 3 years of good service, it would be unjust to consider his honorable discharge of 28 November 1980 as other than a complete and unconditional separation from the military service.

RECOMMENDATION:

1.  That all of the Department of the Army records related to this case be corrected to show that the individual concerned was eligible for a complete and unconditional separation from the military service at the time of his honorable discharge on 28 November 1980.

2.  That so much of the application as is in excess of the foregoing be denied.

BOARD VOTE:  

___rgh___  __bje____  __jps___  GRANT AS STATED IN RECOMMENDATION

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

_______  ______  ___________  DENY APPLICATION

		______________________
		        CHAIRPERSON

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2000036681	
SUFFIX		
RECON		
DATE BOARDED	20000412	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE	UOHC	
DATE OF DISCHARGE	19830901	
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY	AR 635-200 C10	
DISCHARGE REASON	7100	
BOARD DECISION	GRANT	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1. 9218		
2.  0100		
3.  9500		
4.		
5.		
6.