MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:        

	BOARD DATE:            24 February 1999
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR1999015137

	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. Loren G. Harrell		Director	
	Mr. Jessie B. Strickland		Analyst	

	The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Mr. Calvin M. Fowler		Chairperson	
	Mr. Mark D. Manning		Member	
	Ms. Barbara J. Ellis		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 be upgraded to honorable.

APPLICANT STATES:  In effect, that his discharge was unjust and should be upgraded to honorable based on a lack of equity.

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

The applicant enlisted in Chicago, Illinois on 7 February 1977 for a period of 4 years, assignment to Fort Campbell, Kentucky, training as a light weapons infantryman; and payment of a cash enlistment bonus of $2,500.00.

He successfully completed his basic training at Fort Knox, Kentucky and was transferred to Fort Benning, Georgia to undergo his advanced individual training (AIT) as a light weapons infantryman.  While attending AIT, nonjudicial punishment was imposed against the applicant on 17 May 1977 for failure to go to his place of duty.  His punishment consisted of a forfeiture of pay and extra duty and restriction for 7 days.

Upon completion of his AIT he was transferred to Fort Campbell on 13 June 1977.

On 14 July 1977 charges were preferred against the applicant for being AWOL from 8 July to 11 July 1977, for being disrespectful towards a commissioned officer, for two specifications of being disrespectful towards two NCOs,  for assaulting a fellow soldier, and for wrongfully communicating a threat to cut a fellow soldier.

On 9 August 1977 the applicant submitted a request for discharge for the good of the service under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 10, in lieu of trial by court-martial.  In his request he indicated that he was making the request of his own free will and that he had not been subjected to any coercion by any person.  He also indicated that he was guilty of the charges against him or of a lesser included offense which authorized the imposition of a bad conduct or dishonorable discharge.  He further indicated that he understood that he could be issued a discharge under other than honorable conditions and that he understood the implications associated with such a discharge.

The applicant also elected to submit a statement in his own behalf whereas he asserted that he was an excellent soldier, that he had personal problems at home that made him forget his job, that he believed he was needed at home more than in the Army, but that he would always be ready to serve his country.

The appropriate authority approved his request on 22 August 1977 and directed that he be furnished an Undesirable Discharge Certificate.
Accordingly, he was discharged under other than honorable conditions on 24 August 1977 under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 10, in lieu of trial by court-martial.  He had served 6 months and 18 days of total active service and had 3 days of lost time due to AWOL.

On 29 July 1986 he applied to the Army Discharge Review Board (ADRB) for an upgrade of his discharge.  He asserted at that time to that board that at the time he entered the Army he had a very nonchalant attitude about life and that he had since grown through his experiences and now realized that one of his biggest mistakes was obtaining an early release from the Army.  He further contended that he had learned from his mistakes and was now facing his responsibilities.  He requested that his discharge be voided or upgraded.  The applicant was granted a personal appearance before that board whereas he further asserted that his personal problems contributed to his misconduct.  The ADRB determined that the explanation of his conduct was not sufficiently mitigating to warrant an upgrade of his discharge.  The ADRB unanimously denied his request on 6 August 1987.

Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel.  Chapter 10 of the 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 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.

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 voluntary request for separation under the provisions of 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.

2.  Accordingly, the type of discharge directed and the reasons therefore appear to be appropriate considering all of the facts of the case.

3.  The applicant’s contentions have been noted by the Board and appear to be without merit.  The applicant clearly indicated that he understood the implications attached to a discharge under other than honorable conditions.  Additionally, he voluntarily requested a discharge for the good of the service in hopes of avoiding a punitive discharge and having a felony conviction on his records.

4.  While he may now believe that he made the wrong choice, he should not be allowed to change his mind at this late date, especially considering the seriousness of the offenses for which he was charged and his otherwise undistinguished record of service. 

5.  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.

6.  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

___cmf__  __mdm __  __be ___  DENY APPLICATION

						Loren G. Harrell
						Director

INDEX

CASE ID	AR1999015137	
SUFFIX		
RECON		
DATE BOARDED	1999/02/24	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE	UOTHC	
DATE OF DISCHARGE	1978/08/24	
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY	AR 635-200, ch10	
DISCHARGE REASON	In lieu of trial by cm/689	
BOARD DECISION	DENY	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.  A70.00		
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.