MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:   

	BOARD DATE:           14 December 2000
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR2000046734

	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. William Blakely .		Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Ms. June Hajjar		Chairperson	
	Mr. Hubert O. Fry, Jr.		Member	
	Mr. Richard T. Dunbar		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 be upgrade to a general discharge.

APPLICANT STATES:  That his record does not contain any disciplinary actions and no nonjudicial punishment during his enlistment in the Army.  In support of his application he submits a copy of his DD Form 214 (Report of Separation From Active Duty) dated 11 November 1974.

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

The applicant enlisted in the Army on 1 November 1973 for a period of 3 years. His highest rank attained was private (E-2). 

He completed basic combat training and advanced individual training at Fort Jackson, South Carolina.  While assigned to Fort Jackson, South Carolina he received nonjudicial punishment for being AWOL from 24 February 1974 to 
26 February 1974.  After completing his advanced individual training the applicant was assigned to Fort Riley, Kansas.

The applicant had two periods of AWOL (3 June to 8 August 1974 and 26 August to 18 September 1974) while assigned to Fort Riley, Kansas that resulted in court-martial charges being preferred against him.

The applicant was notified on 26 September 1974 of the charges preferred against him for the two periods of AWOL.  After consulting with counsel he voluntarily submitted a request to be discharged for the good of the service in lieu of trial by court-martial.  With his request he submitted a statement in his own behalf stating that he did not want to remain in the Army, he was unable to adjust to the Army, and that his mother and children required his financial support. 

The request for discharge was approved by the appropriate authority and on 
11 November 1974 the applicant was discharged from the Army under other than honorable conditions 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 served 
9 months and 11 days of total active service and had 89 days of lost time due to AWOL.

The applicant submitted a request for an upgrade of his discharge to the Army Discharge Review Board, and it was denied on 12 January 1979.

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 court-martial charges have been preferred.  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, and it is concluded:

1.  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.

2.  The applicant chose to request an administrative discharge rather than risk the consequences of a court-martial.  Although he may now feel that he made the wrong choice, he should not be allowed to change his mind at this late date.

3.  The contentions of the applicant have been noted by the Board.  However, they are not supported by the evidence submitted with the application or the evidence of record.

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 the aforementioned 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

___JH___  __HOF__  __RTD__  DENY APPLICATION

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

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2000046734	
SUFFIX		
RECON	YYYYMMDD	
DATE BOARDED	20001214	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE	(HD, GD, UOTHC, UD, BCD, DD, UNCHAR)	
DATE OF DISCHARGE	YYYYMMDD	
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY	AR .  .  .  .  .  	
DISCHARGE REASON		
BOARD DECISION	DENY	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.	23.00	
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.