MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:       

	BOARD DATE:            12 October 2000
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR2000041094

	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. Deyon D. Battle		Analyst	

The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Mr. John D. Miller		Chairperson	
	Ms. Carol Jo Suiter		Member	
	Mr. John E. Denning		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 he was only involved in one infraction during 25 months of service.  He states that he did not deal drugs nor did he take part in the delivery of drugs.  He also states that he was a passenger in the car and he did not take drugs on the base.

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

On 12 July 1971, he enlisted in the Army for 3 years in the pay grade of E-1.  He successfully completed his training as an armor reconnaissance specialist.  On 16 October 1971, he was promoted to the pay grade of E-2.

Nonjudicial punishment (NJP) was imposed against the applicant on 10 February 1972 for being absent without leave (AWOL) from 21 December 1971 until 20 January 1972.  His punishment consisted of a reduction in pay grade and a forfeiture of pay.

On 28 February 1972, NJP was imposed against him for being AWOL from 20 February until 24 February 1972 and for missing movement.  His punishment consisted of a forfeiture of pay.

On 3 March 1973, NJP was imposed against him for damaging a door while he was fighting and for unlawfully striking another soldier.  His punishment consisted of a reduction in pay grade, a forfeiture of pay and restriction.

The facts and circumstances pertaining to the applicant's discharge are not on file.  The Report of Transfer or Discharge, DD Form 214, indicates that the applicant was discharged on 29 July 1973, under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 10 for the good of the service in lieu of trial by court-martial.  He had completed 2 years and 18 days of total active service and he had approximately 35 days of lost time due to AWOL.  He was issued an Undesirable Discharge Certificate. 

There is no evidence of record that shows that the applicant ever 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 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 an undesirable discharge.

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 contentions have been noted by the Board.  However, they are unsupported by the evidence of record.  Although the facts and circumstances surrounding the applicant’s discharge are not available for review, the evidence of record clearly shows that he was involved in more that one incident while he was in the Army and he submitted a request for discharge for the good of the service in lieu of trial by court-martial.

3.  In the absence of evidence to the contrary, it must be presumed that what the Army did in his case was correct.

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

__cs ____  __jdm___  ___jed __  DENY APPLICATION

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

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2000041094	
SUFFIX		
RECON	YYYYMMDD	
DATE BOARDED	2000/10/10	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE	UD	
DATE OF DISCHARGE	1973/07/29	
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY	AR 635-200	
DISCHARGE REASON	689	
BOARD DECISION	DENY	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.  708	144.7100	
2.  716	144.7300	
3.  713	144.7110	
4.		
5.		
6.