MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:   

	BOARD DATE:            27 May 1999                  
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR1999025909

	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	
	Ms. Camilla Pugh		Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Mr. Edward Williamson		Chairperson	
	Ms. Meta Waller		Member	
	Mr. Kenneth L. Wright		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 under other than honorable conditions (UOTHC) discharge be upgraded to honorable.

APPLICANT STATES:  That he would like an upgrade so that he may qualify for a civil service job.  He also contends that he received several certificates of achievement while working as a 76Y (Supply Specialist).  He states that he has learned a lot about life and being a man, and would like to rid himself of the skeletons in his closet.

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

He enlisted in the Regular Army on 6 November 1984.  He was discharged Under Other Than Honorable Conditions (UOTHC) on 25 March 1986.

He was AWOL 8 July 1985 to 22 Feb 1986 (230 days).

Court-martial charges were preferred against the applicant for AWOL.

On 25 February 1986 he requested discharge for the good of the service, under the provisions of AR 635-200, chapter 10, to avoid trial.  He received counsel and acknowledged he understood he may be discharged under other than honorable conditions and furnished an Under Other Than Honorable Conditions Discharge Certificate.  He also acknowledged he understood as a result of the issuance of such a discharge he would be deprived of many or all Army benefits, ineligible for many or all benefits administered by the VA and may be deprived of his rights and benefits as a veteran under both Federal and State law.  

The appropriate authority approved his request and directed that he be issued an Other Than Honorable Conditions Discharge Certificate.

Accordingly, he was discharged under other than honorable conditions on
25 March 1986 under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 10, for the good of the service in lieu of trial by court-martial.  He was credited with 
11 months, and 5 days total active service and lost time due to AWOL.

The applicant’s appeal to the Army Discharge Review Board for an upgrade of his discharge was denied on 28 April 1999.

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 charges have been preferred and must include the individual's admission of guilt.  

An Honorable discharge is a separation with honor and is appropriate when the quality of the member’s service generally has met the standards of acceptable conduct and performance of duty for Army personnel.

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.  Careful consideration has been given to the applicant’s contention.  However, his absence for which court-martial charges were preferred against him is too serious, and his service was too undistinguished, for equitable relief to be appropriate.  He acknowledged the loss of benefits when he requested discharge in lieu of court-martial trial.

3. He has not convinced the Board he deserves an honorable characterization of his service.

4.  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.

5.  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

ew______  mw_____  klw _____  DENY APPLICATION

						Loren G. Harrell
						Director

INDEX

CASE ID	AR1999025909	
SUFFIX		
RECON	YYYYMMDD	
DATE BOARDED	1999 May 27	
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.