MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:       

	BOARD DATE:            19 April 2001
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR2000051095

	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	
	Ms. Barbara J. Ellis		Member	
	Mr. Curtis L. Greenway		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 or a general discharge.

APPLICANT STATES:  In effect, that the type of discharge he received was too harsh considering the nature of his offenses.

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

On 28 May 1976, he enlisted in the Army for 3 years in the pay grade of E-1.  He successfully completed his training as an infantryman.

Nonjudicial punishment (NJP) was imposed against the applicant on 19 August 1977 for being absent without leave (AWOL) from 9 August until 15 August 1977. His punishment consisted of a reduction in pay grade, forfeiture of pay, restriction and extra duty.

He was convicted by a special court-martial on 23 January 1978, of being AWOL from 16 November until 20 December 1977.  His sentence consisted of confinement at hard labor, a reduction in pay grade, a forfeiture of pay and restriction.

A review of the available records show that the applicant was also AWOL from 31 May until 2 June 1977 and from 17 February 1978 until 10 April 1978.

The facts and circumstances pertaining to the applicant's discharge are not on file.  The Report of Separation (DD Form 214) indicates that the applicant was discharged on 11 May 1978, 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, 8 months and 3 days of total active service and he had 107 days of lost time due to AWOL and confinement.

There is no evidence of record that shows that the applicant 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 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.  It appears that 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 also appear to have been appropriate considering all the facts of the case.

3.  The Board has noted the applicant’s contentions.  However, the evidence of record clearly shows that he had NJP imposed against him and he was convicted by a special court-martial for being AWOL.  He had 107 days of lost time due to AWOL and confinement.  Considering his numerous acts of misconduct it does not appear that the type of discharge he received was too harsh.

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

___be___  ___js ___  ___clg___  DENY APPLICATION

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

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2000051095	
SUFFIX		
RECON	YYYYMMDD	
DATE BOARDED	2001/04/17	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE	UOTHC	
DATE OF DISCHARGE	1978/05/11	
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY	AR 635-200	
DISCHARGE REASON	689	
BOARD DECISION	DENY	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.  689	144.7000.0000	
2.  708	144.7100.0000	
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.