MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:       

	BOARD DATE:            25 January 2001
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR2000048304

	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. Jessie B. Strickland		Analyst	

The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Ms. June Hajjar		Chairperson	
	Mr. Lester Echols		Member	
	Ms. Karen A. Heinz		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 upgraded to a general discharge.

APPLICANT STATES:  The applicant has advanced no arguments or evidence in support of his application to the Board. 

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

The applicant enlisted in Harrisburg, Pennsylvania on 22 October 1976 for a period of 3 years, training as a wheel vehicle mechanic and assignment to Fort Devens, Massachusetts.  He completed his training at Fort Dix, New Jersey and was transferred to Fort Devens on 27 February 1977. 

His records show that he was absent without leave (AWOL) from 29 March to 30 March 1977.  However, there is no indication of any punishment imposed for that offense.

On 20 July 1977 he again went AWOL and remained absent until he was apprehended by Federal Bureau of Investigations officials in Bair, Pennsylvania on 30 January 1978.  He was returned to military control at Carlisle Barracks, Pennsylvania and was transferred to Fort Dix, where charges were preferred against him.

The facts and circumstances surrounding the applicant’s administrative discharge are not present in the available records.  However, his records do contain a duly constituted report of separation (DD Form 214) which shows that he was discharged under other than honorable conditions on 2 March 1978, under the provisions of Army regulation 635-200, chapter 10, in lieu of trial by court-martial.  He had served 9 months and 22 days of total active service and had 199 days of lost time due to AWOL.

There is no indication in the available records to show that he ever applied to the Army Discharge Review Board for an upgrade of his discharge within that board’s 15-year statute of limitations.

Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel.  Chapter 10 of the 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 at any time after charges have been preferred, submit a request for discharge for the good of the service in lieu of trial by court-martial.  A discharge under other than honorable conditions was then and currently 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 must be presumed that 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.  Accordingly, the type of discharge directed and the reasons therefore were appropriate under the circumstances.

3.  It appears that the applicant voluntarily requested a discharge for the good of the service in hopes of avoiding a punitive discharge and having a felony conviction on his records.  While he may now believe that he made the wrong choice, he should not be allowed to change his mind at this late date, especially considering the seriousness of the charges against him and his otherwise undistinguished record of service.

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

__jh ____  ___le____  __kh____  DENY APPLICATION

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

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2000048304	
SUFFIX		
RECON	YYYYMMDD	
DATE BOARDED	2001/01/25	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE	UOTHC	
DATE OF DISCHARGE	1978/03/02	
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY	AR635-200/CHI0	
DISCHARGE REASON	GD OF SVC	
BOARD DECISION	DENY	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.  689	144.7000/A70.00	
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.