MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

IN THE CASE OF:  

BOARD DATE:           5 December 2000
DOCKET NUMBER:   AR2000039248

	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. P. A. Castle		Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Ms. Ann M. Campbell		Chairperson	
	Mr. Allen L. Raub		Member	
	Mr. Jose A. Martinez		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: Reconsideration of his request to correct his records by upgrading his discharge.

APPLICANT STATES:  In effect, that he was accused of drinking on duty on a day the commander had granted him the day off.  He feels he was set up and he is not a bad person.  He also states “I hope these letters will help the Board correct the injustice.”

NEW EVIDENCE OR INFORMATION:  Incorporated herein by reference are military records which were summarized in memorandums of consideration (MOC) prepared to reflect the Board's considerations of his case on 16 September 1987 (AC85-07755) and 18 July 1990 (AC89-08763).

In support of his application the applicant submits three statements from friends who describe him as being dependable and caring, a good family man and a hard worker.  A letter from his employer of fifteen years describes him as person who does not refuse to do anything and is at work every day.  Further, his pastor states he is a kind, respectable man.

These documents were not available to the Board previously.  They are accepted as an implied argument that the applicant’s post-service behavior and conduct warrant the requested relief.

The applicant was discharged for the good of the service to avoid trial by court-martial for being absent without leave for approximately 75 days.  

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 discharge proceedings were conducted in accordance with law and regulations applicable at the time.  The character of the discharge is commensurate with the applicant’s overall record of military service.  The contention about the drinking on duty offense is irrelevant.

2.  The submitted letters about the applicant’s successful post service adjustment and behavior are noted but these matters do not demonstrate an injustice in the discharge.

3.  The overall merits of the case, including the latest submissions and arguments are insufficient as a basis for the Board to reverse its previous decision.

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

__amc__  __alr ____  __jam___  DENY APPLICATION

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

INDEX

CASE ID	AC
AR2000039248	
SUFFIX		
RECON	 	
DATE BOARDED	20001208	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE	(UOTHC)	
DATE OF DISCHARGE	19821013	
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY	AR .635-200	
DISCHARGE REASON	CH 10	
BOARD DECISION	DENY	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.110.00		
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.