MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:   

	BOARD DATE:           24 August 2000
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR2000038428

	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. Robert J. McGowan		Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Mr. George D. Paxson 		Chairperson	
	Mr. Curtis L. Greenway 		Member	
	Mr. Allen L. Raub 		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 under other than honorable conditions (UOHC) discharge be upgraded to general or honorable.

APPLICANT STATES:  That he was promised a general discharge and did not realize that he did not have one.  He provides no evidence in support of his request.

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

He enlisted in the Regular Army for 4 years on 28 December 1979 and was sent to Fort Knox, Kentucky for Basic Armor Training on 11 January 1980.  Upon completion of Basic Armor Training, he was reassigned to Fort Benning, Georgia. 

The applicant did not report to Fort Benning and was carried as absent without leave (AWOL) from18 April 1980 through 11 May 1980.  He accepted nonjudicial punishment (NJP) under Article 15, Uniform Code of Military Justice, for this offense and was punished by forfeiture of $200 per month for 2 months and 45 days of extra duty and restriction.

The applicant went AWOL on 10 June 1980 and remained absent until surrendering to military authorities at Fort Ord, California on 17 June 1980.  Court-martial charges were preferred against him for being AWOL from 10 June 1980 through 16 June 1980.  After consulting with legal counsel, he requested separation for the good of the service in lieu of trial by court-martial under the provisions of chapter 10, AR 635-200.  In so doing, he acknowledged that he was guilty of the charge(s) against him, charges which authorized the imposition of a bad conduct or dishonorable discharge.  He also stated that he had no desire for rehabilitation or further military service, and that he understood the nature and consequences of the UOHC discharge that he might receive.  He declined to submit a statement in his own behalf.

On 26 August 1980, the applicant was discharged with a UOHC discharge, under the provisions of Chapter l0, AR 635-200, in lieu of trial by court-martial.  At the time of discharge, the applicant had 5 months and 27 days of creditable service on his enlistment and 61 days lost time.

The applicant petitioned the Army Discharge Review Board (ADRB) seeking a discharge upgrade.  The ADRB, after considering his case on 13 January 1989, denied his request.

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 submit a request for discharge for the good of the service in lieu of trial by court-martial.  The request may be submitted at any time after charges have been preferred and must include the individual's admission of guilt.  Army policy states that although an honorable or general discharge is authorized, a discharge UOHC 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 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 chose to request an administrative discharge rather than risk the consequences of a court-martial.  His 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.

3.  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

__gdp___  __clg____  __alr____  DENY APPLICATION

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

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2000038428	
SUFFIX		
RECON		
DATE BOARDED	20000824	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE	UOTHC	
DATE OF DISCHARGE	19800826	
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY	AR 635-200 C10	
DISCHARGE REASON	A71.00	
BOARD DECISION	DENY	
REVIEW AUTHORITY	DIRECTOR	
ISSUES         1.	110.0000	
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.