MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF

	BOARD DATE:           16 November 2000
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR2000042798

	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. Carolyn G. Wade		Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Mr. Walter T. Morrison		Chairperson	
	Mr. James E. Anderholm		Member	
	Ms. Martha E. Schuler		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 discharge under other than honorable conditions (UOHC) be recharacterized.

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

On 15 March 1978, the applicant enlisted in the Regular Army for a period of 3 years.  He successfully completed one station unit training (OSUT) at Fort Leonard Wood, Missouri.  Upon completion of OSUT he was awarded the military occupational specialty (MOS) 12B (Combat Engineer) and was assigned to Fort Campbell, Kentucky.

On 29 June 1978, the applicant departed his unit in an absent without leave status (AWOL).  On 28 July 1978, the applicant was dropped from the rolls.

On 9 April 1979, the applicant was apprehended by civil authorities and charged with assisting a criminal.  The applicant was confined in the Madison County Jail pending a court hearing.  On 11 April 1979, the applicant appeared in court and pled guilty to the charge.  The applicant was sentenced to 8 days confinement in the Madison County Jail.  On 19 April 1979, the applicant completed his sentence and was returned to military control.

On 3 May 1979, the applicant was charged with 294 days of AWOL.  On 4 May 1979, the applicant consulted with legal counsel and requested discharge under the provisions of Chapter 10, Army Regulation 635-200, for the good of the service in lieu of trial by court-martial and submitted a statement in his own behalf.  Both the company and intermediate commanders recommended approval of the Chapter 10 request with a UOHC.

On 10 May 1979, the appropriate authority approved the applicant’s request for discharge and directed issuance of a UOHC and a reduction in rank to 
private/E-1.  Accordingly, on 29 May 1979, the applicant was discharged after completing 4 months and 25 days of active military service and accruing 294 days lost time.

There is no evidence that the applicant applied to the Army Discharge Review Board (ADRB) for an upgrade of his discharge within its 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 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.

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's voluntary request for separation under the provisions of Chapter 10, Army Regulation 635-200 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.

2.  The character of the discharge is commensurate with the applicant's overall record of military service.

3.  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.

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

__wtm___  __jea___  __mes___  DENY APPLICATION

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

INDEX

CASE ID	AR20000042798	
SUFFIX		
RECON		
DATE BOARDED	20001116	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE	UOTHC	
DATE OF DISCHARGE	19790529	
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY	AR 635-200, Chapter 10	
DISCHARGE REASON	A71.00	
BOARD DECISION	DENY	
REVIEW AUTHORITY	DASA	
ISSUES         1.		
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.