MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:  

	BOARD DATE:  31 October 2000
	DOCKET NUMBER:  AR2000041169

	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. Vic Whitney		Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Mr. Elzey J. Arledge		Chairperson	
	Ms. Brenda F. Hirschi		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:  In effect, that his other than honorable conditions discharge be upgraded to a general discharge under honorable conditions.

APPLICANT STATES:  That while at Fort Polk, Louisiana he had a problem with alcohol that he received counseling for.  When the counseling stopped he started using alcohol more and more because nobody cared.  He was young and was sorry for his AWOL.  He has kept his life straight and out of trouble.  He wants a second chance at a normal life.

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

He enlisted and entered active duty from the USAR on 14 February 1978 at 19 years of age.  He completed training as an armor crewman and was assigned to various installations and Korea.  He was promoted to pay grade E-5 effective 17 December 1979.

He was AWOL from 1 June to 2 June 1982.  It appears that he accepted punishment under Article 15, UCMJ, which included a suspended one grade reduction.  He was AWOL again from 16 June to 6 July 1982.  It appears that he was convicted by summary court-martial for the AWOL offense.  He was reduced to pay grade E-4.

The applicant departed AWOL again on 5 September 1982 and returned to military control on 13 November 1983.  Charges were preferred for the AWOL offense.  On 18 November 1983, after consulting with counsel, the applicant requested discharge for the good of the service in lieu of trial by court-martial.  In his request he acknowledged that he was guilty of the offense charged which could result in a punitive discharge.  He also acknowledged that he could be denied many or all veteran’s benefits and could encounter prejudice in civilian life if issued an other than honorable conditions discharge.  He waived his right to submit statements in his own behalf.

The separation authority, a major general, approved the request and directed issuance of an under other than honorable conditions discharge and reduction to pay grade E-1.  Effective 21 December 1983 the applicant was separated under the authority of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 10.  He had 4 years, 7 months, and 6 days creditable service and 457 days lost time.

There is no evidence in the available record, or provided by the applicant, that he was enrolled in an alcohol control program or denied treatment for alcohol related problems.

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.  Although an honorable or general discharge is authorized, a discharge under other than honorable conditions is normally considered appropriate.

There is no evidence of record to show that the applicant applied to the Army Discharge Review Board for an upgrade of his discharge within the 15 year time limit.

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 applicant was advised of the effects of a discharge under other than honorable conditions and that he might be deprived of many or all Army and VA benefits.  He was afforded the opportunity to submit statements in his own behalf, but he declined to do so.

2.  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.  The applicant's request for a chapter 10 discharge, even after appropriate and proper consultation with a military lawyer, tends to show he wished to avoid the court-martial and the punitive discharge that he might have received.

3.  The applicant's contention that he was young and immature at the time is not sufficiently mitigating to warrant relief.  The Board notes that the applicant was almost 24 years of age at the time of his first AWOL.

4.  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.

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

___ea__  __bh___  __ar___  DENY APPLICATION

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

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2000041169	
SUFFIX		
RECON		
DATE BOARDED	20001031	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE	UOTHC	
DATE OF DISCHARGE	19831221	
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY	AR 635-200 CH 10	
DISCHARGE REASON	A71.00	
BOARD DECISION	DENY	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.	110.02	
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.