PROCEEDINGS

	IN THE CASE OF:  

	BOARD DATE:           3 August 2000                   
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR1999029600

	I certify that hereinafter is recorded the true and complete record of the proceedings of the Army Board for Correction of Military Records in the case of the above-named individual.  

	Mr. Carl W. S. Chun		Director	
	Mrs. Joyce A. Hughes		Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Mr. John N. Slone		Chairperson	
	Mr. Edwin S. Castle		Member	
	Mr. Calvin M. Fowler		Member	

	The applicant and counsel if any, did not appear before the Board.

	The Board considered the following evidence:

	Exhibit A - Application for correction of military 
                records
	Exhibit B - Military Personnel Records (including
	            advisory opinion, if any)

FINDINGS:

1.  The applicant has exhausted or the Board has waived the requirement for exhaustion of all administrative remedies afforded by existing law or regulations.

2.   The applicant requests in effect, that the character and reason for his discharge be changed.

3.   The applicant states in effect, that his discharge under other than honorable conditions and the reason for his discharge were too harsh.  He further states that the evidence is not supportive of the discharge. 

4.   The applicant’s military records show that he enlisted in the Regular Army on 9 August 1984, for 3 years.  He completed the required training and was awarded military occupational specialty (MOS) 71L (Administrative Specialist).
On 17 May 1987, he was honorably discharged for the purpose of reenlisting.
He had completed 2 years, 9 months and 9 days of honorable active service and was awarded the Army Good Conduct Medal during this enlistment.  On 18 May 1987, he reenlisted for 3 years.  The highest grade he achieved was pay grade E-4.

5.   On 13 October 1989, court-martial charges were preferred against the applicant of being absent without leave (AWOL) from 12 May to 8 October 
1989.

6.   On 13 October 1989, the applicant consulted with legal counsel and voluntarily requested a discharge under the provisions of Army Regulation 
635-200, chapter 10, for the good of the service in lieu of trial by court-martial.  The applicant was advised of the effects of a discharge under other than honorable conditions and that he might be deprived of many or all Army and Veterans Administration benefits.  He was afforded the opportunity to submit statements in his behalf, but he declined to do so.

7.   A mental and a physical evaluation found the applicant fit for retention.

8.   On 14 December 1989, the appropriate authority approved the applicant’s request for discharge and directed the issuance of an Under Other Than Honorable Conditions Discharge Certificate.  On 27 December 1989, the applicant was discharged, in pay grade E-1, under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 10, for the good of service with a discharge UOTHC.  He completed 4 years, 11 months and 20 days of total active service and had 149 days of lost time.

9.   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 included 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.  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.

10.  The VA, in determining qualifications for benefits administered by that agency, generally holds that an individual who accepts a discharge prior to completion of his complete term of obligated service may not be eligible for benefits unless or until the VA determines that the early discharge amounted to a complete and unconditional separation from the service.

11.  On 4 June 1998, the Army Discharge Review Board (ADRB) denied the applicant’s request for a change in the character and/or reason for his discharge.

CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant’s voluntary request for separation under the provisions of chapter 10, Army Regulation 635-200, for the good of the service to avoid trial by court-martial, was administratively correct and in conformance with applicable regulations with no indication of procedural errors which would tend to jeopardize his rights.

2.  The overall quality of the applicant’s last period of service does not warrant an upgrade of his discharge, but in view of the honorable characterization of his prior term of service, his honorable discharge on 17 May 1987, should be considered a complete and unconditional separation.

3.  The circumstances of the applicant’s honorable discharge on 17 May 
1987, have worked an injustice upon him by depriving him of consideration for certain VA benefits for the preceding period of service.

4.  In consideration of the foregoing findings and conclusions, and in recognition of his more than 2 ½ years, of good service, it would be unjust to consider his honorable discharge of 17 May 1987, as other than a complete and unconditional separation from the military service.

RECOMMENDATION:

1.  That all of the Department of the Army records related to this case be corrected by showing that the individual concerned was eligible for a complete and unconditional separation from the military service at the time of his honorable discharge on 17 May 1987.

2.  In view of the foregoing, the applicant’s records should be corrected as recommended below.
RECOMMENDATION:

1.  That all of the Department of the Army records related to this case be corrected by showing that the individual concerned was eligible for a complete and unconditional separation from the military service at the time of his honorable discharge on 17 May 1987.

2.  That so much of the application as is in excess of the foregoing be denied.

BOARD VOTE:  

__jns___  __esc___  __cmf___  GRANT AS STATED IN RECOMMENDATION

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

________  ________  ________  DENY APPLICATION

			John N. Slone
		______________________
		        CHAIRPERSON

INDEX

CASE ID	AR1999029600	
SUFFIX		
RECON		
DATE BOARDED	20000803	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE	UOTHC	
DATE OF DISCHARGE	19891227	
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY	AR 635-200, Ch 10. . . . .  	
DISCHARGE REASON	A71.00	
BOARD DECISION	(GRANT)	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.	100.0300	
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.