MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:       

	BOARD DATE:            7 June 2000
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR2000038100

	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. Jessie B. Strickland		Analyst	

The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Ms. Margaret K. Patterson		Chairperson	
	Mr. Edwin S. Castle		Member	
	Mr. James P. Steuve		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 be upgraded to a general discharge.

APPLICANT STATES:  That his undesirable discharge is not appropriate when compared to current standards, that he was good soldier until he returned from Vietnam, that his service in Vietnam caused him to suffer mentally, and that his offenses were minor in nature.  In support of his application he submits letters of support from his mother, sister, brother, sister-in-law, and a close friend that all attests that he was a changed person when he returned from Vietnam.

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

He was inducted in Dallas, Texas on 5 October 1970.  He completed his training and was transferred to Vietnam on 20 March 1971 for duty as a light air defense artillery crewman.  He served in Vietnam for 9 months and departed for Fort Bliss, Texas on 31 December 1971.

The applicant went AWOL on 7 February and remained absent until he was arrested by civil authorities for shoplifting in El Paso, Texas on 7 March 1972 and was returned to military control.

On 27 March 1972 he was convicted by a summary court-martial of being AWOL from 7 February to 7 March 1972.  He was sentenced to confinement at hard labor for 30 days (suspended until 10 May 1972), a reduction to the pay grade of E-1, and a forfeiture of pay.

He again went AWOL on 8 May 1972 and the suspended portion of his court-martial sentence was vacated.  He remained absent until he was returned to military control on 12 June 1972 and was placed in confinement.

The facts and circumstances surrounding his administrative discharge are not present in the available records; however, his records do contain a duly constituted report of separation (DD Form 214) signed by the applicant.  It reflects that he was discharged under other than honorable conditions on 20 July 1972, under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 10, in lieu of trial by court-martial.  He had served 1 year, 6 months, and 28 days of total active service and had 78 days of lost time due to AWOL and confinement.  His awards include the Vietnam Service Medal and the Republic of Vietnam Campaign Medal.

There is no indication in the available records to show that the applicant applied to the Army Discharge Review Board for an upgrade of his discharge within that board’s 15-year statute of limitations.

Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel.  Chapter 10 of the 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 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 was then and currently 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.  In the absence of evidence to the contrary, it must be presumed that 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.

2.  Accordingly, the type of discharge directed and the reasons therefore were appropriate under the circumstances.

3.  It appears that the applicant voluntarily requested a discharge for the good of the service in hopes of avoiding a punitive discharge and having a felony conviction on his records.  While he may now believe that he made the wrong choice, he should not be allowed to change his mind at this late date, especially considering the seriousness of the charges against him and his otherwise undistinguished record of service. 

4.  The applicant’s contentions have been noted by the Board; however, they are not sufficiently mitigating to warrant relief when compared to his otherwise undistinguished record of service and the available facts of his case.

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

___mkp__  __esc ___  ___jps __  DENY APPLICATION

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

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2000038100	
SUFFIX		
RECON		
DATE BOARDED	2000/06/07	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE	UD	
DATE OF DISCHARGE	1972/10/05	
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY	AR635-200/CH10	
DISCHARGE REASON	689	
BOARD DECISION	DENY	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.  689	144.7000/A70.00/GD OF SVC	
2.  706	144.7017/A70.17/SER OF OFF	
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.