MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:   

	BOARD DATE:                              
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR1999020479

	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	
	Mrs. Carolyn G. Wade		Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Mr. 		Chairperson	
	Mr. 		Member	
	Mr. 		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 he be reinstated in the Army; that item 32 (Remarks) of his DD Form 214 be corrected; and that item 20 (Prior Regular Enlistments) of his DD Form 214 be corrected to reflect that he has 2 years and 14 days of prior service.  The applicant’s original request for correction of his record was denied on 12 January 1972 because of insufficient evidence to support his claim.  The memorandum of consideration is not available and the case is being reviewed de novo.

APPLICANT STATES:  In effect, that the dates listed for AWOL overlap with time spent on sick call and that his general court-martial was unfair.

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

The applicant was honorably discharged from the Army of the United States on 13 July 1962 in the rank of private/E-2 with 2 years and 14 days of active service. On 30 August 1962 he enlisted in the Regular Army for a period of 3 years.  He enlisted on the promise he would be able to return to Germany, however, he was assigned to Fort Benning, Georgia.

Prior to the offenses for which the applicant was eventually dismissed from service, the applicant had two convictions by a special court-martial for AWOL. 

On 2 September 1964 the applicant was found guilty by general court-martial for a period of AWOL totaling 345 days.  He was sentenced to a BCD, forfeiture of all pay and allowances and confinement at hard labor for 9 months.  On 7 October 1964 the sentence was approved as adjudged.  He was confined at the United States Disciplinary Barracks (USDB) to serve his sentence.

After appellate review, the applicant’s confinement was modified from 9 months to 6 months.  Pursuant to Article 66 the sentence was affirmed, as modified and Article 71(c) having been complied with, the sentence, was ordered executed.

Accordingly, on 16 January 1965 the applicant was discharged from the service with a UOHC after completing 10 months and 11 days of active military service on his current enlistment and 3 years and 12 days total time in service.  He accrued 580 days of lost time.

Item 32 (Remarks) of the applicant’s DD Form 214 summarizes periods of lost time due to AWOL and confinement.  Item 20 (Prior Regular Enlistments) appropriately indicates none.  The applicant’s prior service was in the Army of the United States.

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 evidence of record clearly shows that the applicant was adjudged guilty by court-martial and that the convening authority approved the sentence.  Court-martial convictions stand as adjudged or modified by appeal through the judicial process.

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 Board carefully reviewed the entries in item 32 of the applicant’s DD Form 214; however, the Board found no evidence to suggest any impropriety in the information contained within item 32.

4.  The record does not support the applicant’s contention, and no evidence to support it has been submitted by the applicant, that item 20 of his DD Form 214 for his last period of service is incorrect.  The evidence of record shows that the applicant’s prior service was in the Army of the United States and not the Regular Army.  Therefore, the entry in item 20 is correct.

5.  The evidence of record does not support and the applicant provided no independent corroborating evidence to support that he was on sick call at any of the times he was charged with being AWOL.

6.  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.

7.  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

________  ________  ________  DENY APPLICATION

						Loren G. Harrell
						Director

INDEX

CASE ID	AR1999020479	
SUFFIX		
RECON	YYYYMMDD	
DATE BOARDED	199907DD	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE	BCD	
DATE OF DISCHARGE	19650130	
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY	AR 535-200 C3	
DISCHARGE REASON	General Court-martial	
BOARD DECISION	(NC, GRANT , DENY, GRANT PLUS)	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.  9225		
2.9231		
3.9233		
4.		
5.		
6.