MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:  

	BOARD DATE:  19 April 2001
	DOCKET NUMBER:  AR2001052522

	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. 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 honorable.

APPLICANT STATES:  That he was not given a fair hearing.  In support of his application he submits a copy of his DD Form 214.

EVIDENCE OF RECORD:  The applicant's military records show he enlisted on 19 February 1980 as a light weapons infantryman.

On 18 September 1980, he was punished under Article 15, UCMJ, for being AWOL from 21 to 28 July 1980 (7 days).  His punishment consisted of 30 days confinement.

Charges pertaining to the applicant are unavailable for review.

The facts and circumstances pertaining to the applicant’s discharge are not present in the available records.  However, his DD Form 214 shows that on 24 February 1981, he was discharged under the provisions of Army Regulation 
635-200, chapter 10, for the good of the service in lieu of trial by court-martial.
He was furnished an Under Other Than Honorable Conditions Discharge Certificate.  He had a total of 11 months and 29 days of creditable service and had 7 days of lost time due to AWOL.

There is no evidence that the applicant applied to the Army Discharge Review Board for an upgrade of his discharge within its 15-year statute of limitations.

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; however, there is no evidence in the available records, and the applicant has provided no evidence to support his contention or to show that his discharge was unjust and should be upgraded.

2.  In the absence of evidence to the contrary, it must be presumed that the applicant’s administrative separation was accomplished in compliance with applicable regulations with no procedural errors, which would tend to jeopardize his rights.  

3.  The type of separation directed and the reasons therefor were appropriate considering all of the available facts of the case. 

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___  ___be___  ___cg___  DENY APPLICATION

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

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2001052522	
SUFFIX		
RECON	YYYYMMDD	
DATE BOARDED	20010419	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE	UOTHC	
DATE OF DISCHARGE	19810224	
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY	AR 635-200  C, 10	
DISCHARGE REASON		
BOARD DECISION	DENY	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.  189		
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.