MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:       

	BOARD DATE:            27 February 2001
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR2000048860

	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. Deyon D. Battle		Analyst	

The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Mr. John N. Slone		Chairperson	
	Mr. Roger W. Able		Member	
	Mr. Melvin H. Meyer		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 an honorable discharge.

APPLICANT STATES:  That he went AWOL because he heard that his father had a heart attack.  He states that he was addicted to heroin and contracted hepatitis and the doctor told him that he had less than 20 years to live.  He goes on to state that his drug abuse was being investigated and the Inspector General’s office wanted him to sign a statement naming the person who was responsible for getting him addicted to heroin.  He states that his father had another heart attack and he was given a pass to return home.  He concludes by stating that he was young, scared and confused and going AWOL was the only way he could see to get out of going back to Germany.

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

On 28 July 1976 he enlisted in the Army for 3 years in the pay grade of E-1 at Fort Leonard Wood, Missouri.  

On 7 August 1976, prior to his completion of basic combat training he went absent without leave (AWOL) and he remained AWOL until he returned to military control on 13 August 1976.

He successfully completed his training as a combat engineer and he was transferred to Germany on 5 November 1976.

The applicant was hospitalized from 1 November until 7 November 1977.  He was diagnosed as having viral hepatitis, resolving, with no signs of drug abuse.  He was placed on light duty and he was told to return to the medical clinic in two weeks for a follow up liver function test.

On 19 April 1978, the applicant was notified that charges were pending against him for being AWOL from 27 November until 10 December 1977 and from 7 January until 15 February 1978.  He acknowledged receipt of the notification and, after consulting with counsel, he submitted a request for discharge under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 10 for the good of the service in lieu of trial by court-martial.  

The appropriate authority approved the request for discharge on 2 May 1978.  Accordingly, on 17 July 1978, the applicant was discharged 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 completed 1 year, 9 months and 10 days of total active service and he had 71 days of lost time due to AWOL. 

His Report of Separation (DD Form 214) shows that he was also AWOL from 17 December until 28 December 1977.

On 16 January 1981, the Army Discharge Review Board (ADRB) denied the applicant’s request for an upgrade of his discharge.

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 administrative separation was accomplished in compliance with applicable regulations with no indication of procedural errors which would tend to jeopardize his rights.

2.  The type of discharge directed and the reasons therefor were appropriate considering all the facts of the case.

3.  The applicant’s contentions have been noted by the Board.  However, they are unsupported by the evidence of record.  Although the records do indicate that he was diagnosed as having viral hepatitis, there were no signs of drug abuse or that an investigation had been initiated as a result of any type of use.  Additionally, there is no evidence of record that shows that he was told that he had only 20 years to live.  He went AWOL on four separate occasions for a total of 71 days and he chose to submit a request for discharge for the good of the service in lieu of trial by court-martial.  Although he may now believe that he made the wrong choice, he should not be allowed to change his mind at this late date.

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

__js_____  ___ra ___  ___mm__  DENY APPLICATION

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

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2000048860	
SUFFIX		
RECON	YYYYMMDD	
DATE BOARDED	2001/02/27	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE	UOTHC	
DATE OF DISCHARGE	1978/07/17	
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY	AR 635-200	
DISCHARGE REASON	689	
BOARD DECISION	DENY	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.  708	144.7100	
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.