MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:  

	BOARD DATE:  3 April 2001
	DOCKET NUMBER:  AR2000050668

	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. Joyce A. Wright		Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Mr. Walter T. Morrison		Chairperson	
	Mr. John T. Meixell		Member	
	Mr. Thomas Baxter		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:  That personal elements and surrounding circumstances 
led to his discharge which were not taken into account.  He also states that he had family problems which led to his AWOL.  In support of his application he submits a copy of his DD Form 214 (Report of Separation from Active Duty), a copy of a personal statement, and several character references and certificates. 

EVIDENCE OF RECORD:  The applicant's military records show he enlisted on 5 July 1977 as a combat engineer.

The applicant departed AWOL on 19 October 1977, after completion of his one
station unit training (OSUT) at Fort Leonard Wood, Missouri, and surrendered to military authorities at Fort Campbell, Kentucky on 7 November 1977.

The applicant departed AWOL again on 15 November 1977 and remained AWOL until he was apprehended by civilian authorities in Monessen, Pennsylvania on
28 February 1978, and was returned to military control on 1 March 1978.

The applicant underwent a separation medical examination on 2 March 1978 and was found qualified for separation.

Charges were preferred against the applicant on 3 March 1978, for being 
AWOL from 15 November 1977 to 28 February 1978 (106 days) and from 19 October to 6 November 1977 (19 days).

On 8 March 1978, he consulted with counsel and voluntarily requested discharge for the good of the service in lieu of trial by court-martial, under the provisions of AR 635-200, chapter 10.  In doing so, he admitted guilt to the offense charged and acknowledged that he might encounter substantial prejudice in civilian life and might be ineligible for many or all benefits administered by the Veterans Administration (VA) if a discharge under other than honorable conditions were issued.  He also elected not to submit a statement in his own behalf.

On 17 March 1978, the separation authority approved the applicant’s request for discharge and directed that he be furnished an Under Other Than Honorable Conditions Discharge Certificate.  The applicant was discharged on 29 March 1978.  He had a total of 4 months and 23 days of creditable service and 125 days of lost time due to AWOL.

The applicant applied to the Army Discharge Review Board (ADRB) for an upgrade of his discharge on 13 November 1978.  The ADRB determined that his discharge was proper and equitable and denied his request on 8 July 1981.
Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for 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 the 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 Board notes the applicant’s contention that personal elements and 
surrounding circumstances led to his discharge which were not taken into account.  However, the evidence of record shows that the applicant consulted with counsel but declined to submit statements in his own behalf.  

2.  The Board also notes the applicant’s past service achievements; however, there is no evidence in the personnel records, and the applicant has provided no evidence, to show that his discharge was unjust and should be upgraded.  While the Board recognizes the applicant’s academic achievements, these are not reasons to upgrade his discharge.  

3.  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.  

4.  The type of discharge directed and the reasons for that separation were appropriate considering all of the facts of the case.

5.  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.

6.  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

__wm____  ___jm___  __tb____  DENY APPLICATION

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

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2000050668	
SUFFIX		
RECON	YYYYMMDD	
DATE BOARDED	20010403	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE	UOTHC	
DATE OF DISCHARGE	19780329	
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY	AR .635-200, C 10	
DISCHARGE REASON		
BOARD DECISION	DENY	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.  189		
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.