MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:   

	BOARD DATE:            23 March 2000                  
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR1999031542

	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 Thomas		Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Ms. Shirley L. Powell		Chairperson	
	Mr. Roger Able		Member	
	Mr. James E. Anderholm		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.

APPLICANT STATES:  That his discharge should be upgraded from general under honorable conditions to honorable.

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

On 14 August 1981, he enlisted in the Army National Guard for a period of 
6 years.

On 29 January 1982, he was ordered to active duty for a period of 23 weeks.  

On 17 May 1982, after completing basic training at Fort Dix, New Jersey, the applicant was assigned to Aberdeen Proving Ground, Maryland for advanced individual training, however, the applicant went AWOL (absent without leave) in transit.  

On 21 September 1982, he was convicted by a summary court-martial for being AWOL from 22 May to 2 September 1982.  He was sentenced to confinement at hard labor for 3 weeks and a forfeiture.

The applicant was in confinement from 21 September to 8 October 1982, when he was released upon completion of his sentence.  

The applicant was AWOL from 23 October 1982 until apprehended by civil authorities on 10 February 1983.  While awaiting transportation to the Personnel Control Facility at Fort Knox, Kentucky the applicant went AWOL and remained so from 14 February 1983 to 18 May 1983, when apprehended by military authorities in Columbus, Ohio.

On 23 May 1983, the applicant signed a statement in which he voluntarily declared that he was AWOL from 23 October 1982 to 10 February 1983, and from 14 February 1983 to 18 May 1983.

The facts and circumstances pertaining to the applicant’s discharge are not in the available records.  The Report of Separation (DD Form 214) indicates the applicant was discharged on 27 June 1983, under Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 10, for the good of the service, in lieu of trial by court-martial, and was issued an under other than honorable conditions discharge; it also reflects that the applicant had 6 months and     11 days of creditable service and 323 days of lost time.  

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 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.  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 the aforementioned requirement

2.  In the absence of evidence to the contrary, it is presumed that the discharge proceeding were conducted in accordance with law and regulation applicable at the time.

3.  The applicant voluntarily requested separation under Army regulation 635-200, chapter 10, for the good of the service, to avoid trial by court-martial.  The character of the discharge is commensurate with his overall record of military service.

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

___jlp___  ___ra____  __jea___  DENY APPLICATION

						Karl F. Schneider
						Director, Army Review Boards Agency

INDEX

CASE ID	AR1999031542	
SUFFIX		
RECON	YYYYMMDD	
DATE BOARDED	200003023	
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.