MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:   

	BOARD DATE:           8 March 2000                   
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR1999030462

	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.

	Ms. Gale J. Thomas		Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Mr. Raymond V. O’Connor, Jr.		Chairperson	
	Mr. Elzey J. Arledge, Jr.		Member	
	Mr. Ernest W. Lutz, Jr.		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 records be corrected by upgrading his discharge to honorable.

APPLICANT STATES:  That his discharge states that a general court-martial occurred, but the military threw the case out at Fort Stewart, Georgia.

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

On 9 March 1978, he enlisted in the Regular Army for a period of 3 years.  The applicant completed advanced individual training at Fort Benning, Georgia, and was assigned to Fort Stewart, Georgia. 

The applicant was assigned to the 21st  Replacement Battalion per Order 105-7, dated 23 May 1979, with a report date of 9 November 1979. 

On 7 February 1980, the applicant’s commander preferred court-martial charges against him for being absent without leave (AWOL) from 9 November 1979, until he surrendered to military authorities on 28 January 1980 at Fort Polk, Louisiana.

On 7 February 1980, a Mental Status Evaluation psychiatrically cleared the applicant for separation.

On 8 February 1980, the applicant, after consulting with legal counsel, voluntarily submitted a request for discharge for the good of the service, under Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 10, in lieu of trial by court-martial.  He was advised of his rights, and indicated he understood the possible ramifications of an other than honorable conditions discharge.  

On 6 March 1980, the appropriate separation authority approved the applicant’s request and directed his reduction to pay grade E-1, and the issuance of an under other than honorable conditions (UOTHC) discharge certificate.

On 12 March 1980, the applicant was discharged with an under other than honorable conditions discharge, under the above cited regulation.  His Report of Separation indicates he had 1 year, 9 months and 15 days of creditable service and 80 days of lost time.

On 1 June 1983, the Army Discharge Review Board (ADRB) denied the applicant’s request to upgrade his discharge 

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 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 UOTHC 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.  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.  

2.  The applicant has failed to submit evidence that would satisfy the aforementioned requirement.

3.  The applicant’s voluntary request for separation under Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 10, for the good of the service, to avoid trial by court-martial was administratively correct and in conformance with applicable regulations.  The applicant’s discharge certificate does not state that a court-martial occurred.

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___  ___eja__  ___ewl___  DENY APPLICATION

						Karl F. Schneider
						Director, Army Review Boards Agency

INDEX

CASE ID	AR1999030462	
SUFFIX		
RECON	YYYYMMDD	
DATE BOARDED	20000308	
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.