MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:  

	BOARD DATE:  1 August 2000
	DOCKET NUMBER:  AR1999033765

	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. Lee Cates		Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Ms. Deborah S. Jacobs 		Chairperson	
	Mr. Ernest W. Lutz		Member	
	Ms. Karol A. Kennedy		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 to show that he was separated with an honorable discharge.

APPLICANT STATES:  That he went AWOL (absent without leave) while being seen by a medical doctor and feels his discharge was wrong.

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

During the period 7 January to 11 February 1997, he served in the Army Reserve Delayed Enlistment Program.

On 12 February 1997, he entered active duty.  He completed his required training and was awarded military occupational specialty 77F (Petroleum Supply Specialist).

On 3 September 1997, at 0630 hours, he was placed in an AWOL status by the Replacement Detachment, Fort Campbell, Kentucky.  

On 3 September 1997, medical authorities at Fort Sill, Oklahoma documented that he needed an evaluation for chronic headaches, chest pain, knee pain and guaiac positive stools.

On 12 January 1998, he surrendered to military authorities at Fort Sill, Oklahoma.

On 14 January 1998, his unit commander at Fort Sill, preferred charges against the applicant for AWOL for the period 3 September 1997 to 12 January 1998.

On 15 January 1998, after consulting with legal counsel, the applicant voluntarily submitted a request for discharge under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 10, for the good of the service in lieu of trial by court-martial.  He acknowledged that he was quilty; that he could receive a UOTHC discharge; that he understood the effects of receiving such a discharge; that he had consulted with legal counsel and that he had been fully advised of the nature of his rights, the facts which must be established by competent evidence beyond a reasonable doubt to sustain a finding of guilty, the possible defenses whch appeared to be available at the time, and the maximum permissible punishment if he were found guilty.  The applicant indicated he did not desire a physical evaluation prior to separation.

On 2 April 1998, the appropriate separation authority approved his separation with a UOTHC discharge and directed his reduction to pay grade E-1.

On 17 April 1998, the applicant was discharged, with a UOTHC discharge, under the above-cited regulation. His Report of Separation indicates that he had           9 months and 25 days of creditable service and 131 days of lost time.  He also had 91 days of excess leave.

Army Regulation 635-200, then in effect, set forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel.  Chapter 10, of that regulation, provided, in pertinent part, that a member who had committed an offense of offenses for which the authorized punishment included a punitive discharge could at any time after the charges had been preferred, submit a request for discharge for the good of the service in lieu of trial by court-martial.  At the time of the applicant’s separation, the regulation provided for an UOTHC discharge with the issuance of an Undesirable Discharge Certificate.

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 chose to request an administrative discharge rather than risk the consequence of a court-martial.  Although he may now feel that he made the wrong choice, he should not be allowed to change his mind at this late date.

2.  The medical evidence of record indicates that the applicant was medically fit for retention at the time of his separation.  He has submitted no probative medical evidence to the contrary.

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

__dj___  ___el___  ___kk___  DENY APPLICATION

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

INDEX

CASE ID	AR1999033765	
SUFFIX		
RECON	YYYYMMDD	
DATE BOARDED	20000801	
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	Discharge Upgrade	
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.