MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:   

	BOARD DATE:           30 August 2001
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR2001058065

	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	
	Mr. William Blakely		Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Mr. Raymond V. O’Connor, Jr.		Chairperson	
	Mr. Christopher J. Prosser		Member	
	Ms. Linda D. Simmons		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: In effect, that his under other than honorable conditions (UOTHC) discharge be upgraded to honorable discharge.

APPLICANT STATES:  In effect, that he has been incarcerated and feels that the passage of time warrants an upgrade of his discharge.  In support of his application he submits a certificate of training from the state of Alabama and a copy of his Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty (DD Form 214).

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

On 1 April 1982, the applicant enlisted in the Army for 3 years.  The highest rank he attained while serving on active duty was specialist (E-4).  He successfully completed basic combat training, advanced individual training, and he was subsequently assigned to Fort Benning, Georgia.  

While assigned to Fort Benning, Georgia, the applicant was absent without leave (AWOL) from 25 May 1985 to 10 June 1985.  Item 27 (Remarks) of the applicant’s Personnel Qualification Record (DA Form 2-1) indicates he went AWOL again on 16 August 1985 and was apprehended on 25 October 1985, by civilian authorities in Alamogordo, New Mexico.  He remained in custody of the civilian authorities and was convicted on 17 December 1985 of first degree robbery, auto larceny with a deadly weapon, and assault with the intent to commit murder.  He was sentenced to 15 years civilian confinement.

The applicant’s discharge packet containing the specific facts and circumstances surrounding his discharge is not in the record.  However, there is a properly constituted separation document (DD Form 214) on file that contains the authority and reason for discharge.  This document was authenticated by the applicant with his signature.  It confirms that on 17 March 1986, he was discharged under the provisions of chapter 14, Army Regulation 635-200, for conviction by civil authorities.  It also shows that his service was characterized as UOTHC and that he had completed only 3 years and 7 months of active military service.

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

Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel.  Chapter 14 establishes policy and prescribes procedures for separating members for misconduct.  Specific categories include minor disciplinary infractions, a pattern of misconduct, commission of a serious offense, convictions by civil authorities, desertion or absence without leave.  Action will be taken to separate a member for misconduct when it is clearly established that rehabilitation is impracticable or is unlikely to succeed.  Army policy states that a discharge UOTHC is normally considered appropriate, but a general discharge under honorable conditions or an honorable discharge may be granted.

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.  Lacking evidence to the contrary, administrative regularity is presumed in the applicant’s administrative separation under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 14, for conviction by civil authorities.

2.  The Board notes the applicant’s contention that his extensive period of incarceration and the passage of time warrants an upgrade of his discharge is without merit.  The Board finds the type of discharge directed and the reasons therefor were and are appropriate considering all the facts of the case.

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

___RVO__  __CJP__  __LDS __  DENY APPLICATION

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

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2001058065	
SUFFIX		
RECON	YYYYMMDD	
DATE BOARDED	2001/08/30	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE	(UOTHC)	
DATE OF DISCHARGE	19860317	
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY	AR635-200, chapter 14  .  .  .  	
DISCHARGE REASON	conviction by civil authorities	
BOARD DECISION	(DENY)	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1 67.30.		
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.