MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:   

	BOARD DATE:            8 February 2001                  
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR2000048287

	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. Beverly A. Young		Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Ms. Joann Langston		Chairperson	
	Mr. George D. Paxson		Member	
	Mr. Donald P. Hupman		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 (UOTHC) be upgraded.

APPLICANT STATES:  In effect, that because he was young and away from his family overseas, he got caught up in alcohol abuse.

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

The applicant enlisted on 24 August 1976 and completed infantry training.  He served in Germany from 2 January 1977 through 23 December 1979.  

The applicant received nonjudicial punishment on three separate occasions for disobeying a lawful order, carelessly discharging a 45 caliber pistol in the unit motor pool, assaulting a German National, violating a lawful general regulation, two specifications of failing to go to his appointed place of duty and two specifications of breaking restriction.

On 28 June 1979, the applicant was convicted by a special court-martial of four specifications of AWOL.  He was sentenced to confinement at hard labor for 2 months, forfeiture of $100 per month for 2 months, reduction to PV1 and to be discharged from the Army with a bad conduct discharge.  The portion of the sentence pertaining to the bad conduct discharge was suspended on 4 September 1979.

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 24 December 1979, under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 10, for administrative discharge conduct triable by court-martial, and was issued an under other than honorable conditions discharge.  He had 2 years, 11 months and 11 days of creditable service with 112 days of lost time due to AWOL and confinement.

Prior to his discharge, the applicant underwent a separation medical examination and mental evaluation and was found fit for separation.

There is no indication in the applicant’s records which shows he applied to the Army Discharge Review Board 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.  In the absence of evidence to the contrary, it is presumed that the discharge proceedings were conducted in accordance with law and regulations applicable at the time.  The character of the discharge is commensurate with his overall record.

2.  In view of the applicant's numerous acts of indiscipline, it does not appear that his discharge under other than honorable conditions was too severe.

3.  The applicant's contention that he was young at the time of his offenses is not sufficiently mitigating to warrant relief.  The Board notes that the applicant was almost 22 years of age at the time of his first offense.

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

JL______  GDP_____  DPH_____  DENY APPLICATION

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

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2000048287	
SUFFIX		
RECON	YYYYMMDD	
DATE BOARDED	20010208	
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.	110.0000	
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.