MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:   

	BOARD DATE:           9 November 2000                            
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR2000041768

	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	
	Mrs. Judy Blanchard-Miller		Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Ms. Jennifer L. Prater		Chairperson	
	Ms. Barbara J. Lutz		Member	
	Mr. Orville W. Troesch, Jr.		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 discharge under other than honorable conditions (UOTHC) be upgraded to an honorable discharge.

APPLICANT STATES:  In effect, he feels like he made a mistake, because of his youth.  He further states, in effect, that no one explained the effects of receiving a discharge UOTHC.

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

On 26 February 1951, after having had prior enlisted service, he was discharged to accept an appointment as a warrant officer.  At the time of his appointment for warrant officer, he was 32 years old. 

On 24 September 1952, court-martial charges were preferred against the applicant for one specification of unlawfully purchasing about 150 cases of beer from the United States Post for the purpose of resale to persons not authorized to purchase from an Army or Air Force Exchange.  One specification of wrongfully and unlawfully accepting $1, 050 in military certificates from a Korean Nationalist. 

On 18 October 1952, the applicant voluntarily tendered his resignation from the Army under the provisions of Army Regulation 605-275, for the good of the service in lieu of trial by court-martial.  The applicant acknowledged that he understood the effects of a discharge under other than honorable conditions and that he might be deprived of many or all Army and Veterans Administration benefits.  He was afforded the opportunity to submit statements in his behalf.  He stated in effect, that he did not want to stay in the Army and would accept a discharge UOTHC.  

On 17 December 1952, the Commanding General approved the applicant’s tender of resignation and directed that the applicant be relieved from active duty and discharged from his appointment as a warrant officer for the good of the service in lieu of trial by courts-martial.  On 20 January 1953, the applicant was discharged from active duty, under the provisions of Army Regulation 605-275, by reason of acceptance of resignation for the good of service with a discharge UOTHC.  He had completed 10 years, 6 months and 19 days of creditable active service. 

Army Regulation 605-275 sets forth the basic authority for the good of service.  Paragraph 4 of that regulation provides, in pertinent part, that an officer who conduct has rendered him triable by court martial for an offense punishable by dismissal.  Regardless of whether charges have been preferred, or an officer who is under a suspended sentence of dismissal, may tender his resignation for the good of the service.

On 6 August 1979, the Army Discharge Review Board denied the applicant’s request for an upgrade of his 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 voluntary resignation for the good of service under the provisions of Army Regulation 605-275, 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 acknowledged that he understood the effects of a discharge UOTHC.

3.  Therefore, the type of discharge directed and the reasons therefore were appropriate considering all the facts of the case.

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

__jlp___  __bjl___  __owt___  DENY APPLICATION

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

 
INDEX

CASE ID	AR200004768	
SUFFIX		
RECON		
DATE BOARDED	20001109	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE	UOTHC	
DATE OF DISCHARGE	19530123	
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY	AR605-275 .  .  .  .  .  	
DISCHARGE REASON	A80.00	
BOARD DECISION	(DENY)	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.	144.8000	
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.