MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:   

	BOARD DATE:           10 June 1999                             
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR1999020231

	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. Judy L. Blanchard		Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Mr. Samuel A. Crumpler		Chairperson	
	Ms. Shirley L. Powell		Member	
	Mr. Elzey J. Arledge, 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 bad conduct discharge (BCD) be upgraded to an honorable discharge. 

APPLICANT STATES: In effect, that he already has two honorable discharges.  He would like his third discharge upgraded.

EVIDENCE OF RECORD: The applicant’s military record shows:

He reenlisted in the Regular Army on 25 February 1964, with 7 years, 11 months and 6 days of prior active service.  The applicant’s military occupational specialty was 71F30 ( Postal Clerk).  The highest grade he achieved was pay grade E-5.   

On 2 March 1966, the applicant was convicted by a general court-martial for the wrongful appropriation of $992.00 US currency, property of the United States.  He was sentenced to a reduction to pay grade E-1, confinement at hard labor for 6 months, forfeiture of all pay and allowances and to be discharged from service with a BCD.  On 25 April 1966, the sentence was approved by the general court-martial convening authority.  The record of trial was forwarded to the Judge Advocate General of the Army for review by a board of review.  On 1 May 1966, the United States Army Court of Military Review affirmed the sentenced and the finding of guilty.  The applicant’s record does not indicate that he petitioned the United States Court of military Appeals for a grant of review. 

On 22 September 1966, the applicant was discharged, in pay grade E-1 under the provisions of the Army Regulation 635-204, chapter 4, as a result of a court-martial, with a BCD.  He had completed 2 years, 1 month and 28 days of active military service during this enlistment.

Title 10, United States Code, section 1552, as amended, precludes any action by this Board which would disturb the finality of a court-martial conviction.

DISCUSSION:  Considering all the evidence, allegations, and information presented by the applicant, together with the evidence of record, applicable law and regulations, and advisory opinion(s), 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.  Trial by court-martial was warranted by the gravity of the offenses charged.  Conviction and discharge were effected in accordance with applicable law and regulations, and the discharge appropriately characterizes the misconduct for which the applicant was convicted. 

3.  The applicant has submitted neither probative evidence nor convincing argument in support of the request.

4.  The applicant has failed to provide any basis for the Board to grant clemency in his case.

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

__SAC___  __SLP___  __EJA__  DENY APPLICATION

						Loren G. Harrell
						Director

INDEX

CASE ID	AR1999020231	
SUFFIX		
RECON		
DATE BOARDED	19990610	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE	BCD	
DATE OF DISCHARGE	19660425	
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY	AR 635-204.  .  .  .  .  	
DISCHARGE REASON	A68.00	
BOARD DECISION	DENY	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.	144.68	
2.	110.00	
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.