MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF: 

	BOARD DATE:           31 JULY 2001
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR2001056913

	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. Deborah L. Brantley		Senior Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Mr. Walter T. Morrison		Chairperson	
	Mr. Arthur A. Omartian		Member	
	Mr. John T. Meixell		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 under other than honorable conditions discharge be upgraded to honorable.

APPLICANT STATES:  He was a young 20 year old and drank heavily and as a result lost track of time and went AWOL (absent without leave).  He notes that the result was his undesirable discharge.  The applicant contends that he has straightened out his life, is a good citizen and wants to "erase" the stigma of his discharge.  In support of his request he submits two statements attesting to his good character and that he is a good family man.

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

He entered active duty on 29 August 1974 and successfully completed basic and advanced individual training as an infantryman.  In January 1975 he assumed duties as a vehicle driver at Fort Hood, Texas.  In January 1976, at the age of 19, the applicant was promoted to pay grade E-4 and received a performance evaluation which noted that his "performance of duty is very outstanding" and that he was "superior to most men of his grade."  Between February 1975 and July 1976 the applicant was punished on four different occasions under Article 15 of the UCMJ (Uniform Code of Military Justice) for failing to go to his appointed place of duty, disobeying an order and AWOL.

On 21 July 1976 the applicant departed AWOL again and on 19 August 1976 he was dropped from the rolls of the Army.  He returned to military control in October 1976.

When charges were preferred, the applicant consulted with counsel and voluntarily requested discharge for the good of the service in lieu of trial by court-martial.  His request acknowledged he understood the nature and consequences of the under other than honorable conditions discharge which he might receive.  He indicated he understood he could be denied some or all veterans' benefits as a result of his discharge and that he may be deprived of rights and benefits as a veteran under both Federal and State law.  He did not submit any statements on his own behalf.

A mental health evaluation, conducted on 8 October 1976, found the applicant fully alert and oriented, his memory good, and his thought process clear and normal.  It determined the applicant was mentally responsible, able to distinguish right from wrong and to adhere to the right.

His request was approved and on 18 November 1976 the applicant was discharged under other than honorable conditions under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 10, in lieu of trial by court-martial.  

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 at any time after the 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 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.  While the Board has considered the applicant’s age at the time of his military service and his good post-service conduct, none of these factors, either individually or in sum, warrant the relief requested.  Additionally, the Board notes that during the applicant’s first year of service, when he was only 19 years of age, he was recognized as an outstanding soldier for his grade.

3.  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.

4.  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

__WTM  _  __AAO__  __JTM __  DENY APPLICATION

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

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2001056913	
SUFFIX		
RECON	YYYYMMDD	
DATE BOARDED	20010731	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE	(HD, GD, UOTHC, UD, BCD, DD, UNCHAR)	
DATE OF DISCHARGE	YYYYMMDD	
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY	AR .  .  .  .  .  	
DISCHARGE REASON		
BOARD DECISION	DENY	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.	110.00	
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.