MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

		IN THE CASE OF:      

		BOARD DATE:           25 September 2003                   
		DOCKET NUMBER:   AR2003088544

	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. Joseph A. Adriance .		Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Mr. John N. Slone		Chairperson	
	Ms. Regan K. Smith		Member	
	Mr. 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 undesirable discharge (UD) be upgraded to an honorable discharge (HD).  

APPLICANT STATES:  In effect, that he has several issues that he could gladly discuss; however, he provides no further explanation of these issues.  

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

On 19 February 1974, he enlisted in the Regular Army and entered active duty for three years.  The applicant’s record documents no acts of valor, significant achievement, or service warranting special recognition, and it shows that highest rank he attained while serving on active duty was private/E-2 (PV2).  

On 16 September 1974, while still in training, the applicant departed from his unit absent without leave (AWOL).  On 15 October 1974, he was dropped from the rolls of his organization.  He remained away until returning to military control on 10 December 1974.  

The facts and circumstances surrounding the applicant’s discharge processing are not in the record.  However, there is a separation document (DD Form 214) on file that confirms that on 23 December 1974, he received an UD discharge under the provisions of chapter 10, Army Regulation 635-200, in lieu of trial by court-martial.  The separation document also verifies that at the time of his discharge he had accrued 98 days of time lost due to AWOL and confinement.

There is no indication that the applicant requested an upgrade of his discharge from the Army Discharge Review Board within its 15 year stature 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 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.  However, at the time of the applicant's separation the regulation provided for the issuance of an undesirable discharge.

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 record is void of the specific facts and circumstances surrounding his discharge processing.  However, it does confirm that he was charged with an offense that was punishable under the Uniform Code of Military Justice with a punitive discharge.  It also contains a properly constituted 
DD Form 214, which identifies the reason and characterization of his discharge.  Therefore, the Board presumes Government regularity in the discharge process. 

2.  In the absence of information to the contrary, the Board is satisfied that all requirements of law and regulation were met and the rights of the applicant were fully protected throughout the separation process.  Further, the Board finds that the applicant’s discharge accurately reflects the overall quality of his relatively short and undistinguished record of service.  Thus, the Board finds no evidentiary basis upon which to support granting the requested relief. 

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

_ _JS__  __LDS___  __RKS___  DENY APPLICATION

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

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2003088544	
SUFFIX		
RECON		
DATE BOARDED	2003./09/DD	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE	UD	
DATE OF DISCHARGE	1974/12/23	
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY	AR 635-200 C10	
DISCHARGE REASON	In lieu of court-martial 	
BOARD DECISION	DENY	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.  189	110.0000	
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.