MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:   

	BOARD DATE:  13 January 2000
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR1999025323

	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. Vic Whitney		Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Mr. Ernest M. Willcher		Chairperson	
	Mr. Ernest W. Lutz, Jr.		Member	
	Ms. Margaret V. Thompson		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 adjudged by a general court-martial be upgraded to a general discharge.

APPLICANT STATES:  That he applied for an upgrade in 1979 and never received a response.

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

He enlisted and entered active duty on 14 April 1964.  He completed training as a heavy machine operator and was assigned to Fort Hood, Texas.  He was promoted to grade E-3 effective 27 January 1965.  On 14 April 1965 he reenlisted for training in helicopter maintenance.

While in training he was AWOL from 7 to 26 September 1965 and again from 4 October to 2 November 1965.  On 7 December 1965 he was convicted by summary court-martial of the two periods of AWOL and was sentenced to confinement at hard labor for 30 days.

After his release from confinement the applicant was AWOL again from 3 January to 30 June 1966.  He escaped from pretrial confinement on 29 August 1966 and was apprehended by civil authorities on 1 October 1966 and returned to military control.

On 4 January 1967 the applicant was convicted by general court-martial of the two AWOL offenses and sentenced to a dishonorable discharge and 1 year confinement.  On 27 January 1967 the convening authority approved only so much of the sentence as provided for a bad-conduct discharge and confinement for 10 months.  The approved sentence was affirmed on 2 March 1967.

Effective 1 May 1967 the applicant was separated under authority of Army Regulation 635-204 under conditions other than honorable and issued a bad conduct discharge.  He had 1 year, 5 months, and 21 days creditable service and 573 days lost time.  He was released from confinement on 8 September 1967.

Army Regulation 635-204 provided for the bad-conduct discharge of an enlisted person pursuant to an approved sentence of a general court-martial.

There is no evidence of record and none submitted by the applicant that he applied to this Board for an upgrade in 1979 or that he applied to the Army discharge Review Board for a review of his discharge within the 15 year time limit.

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.  Considering all the facts in this case the applicant is not entitled to the relief he now seeks.

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.  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.

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

__EW___  __EL___  __MT___  DENY APPLICATION

						Karl F. Schneider
				      Director, Army Review Boards Agency

INDEX

CASE ID	AR1999025323	
SUFFIX		
RECON		
DATE BOARDED	20000113	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE	BCD	
DATE OF DISCHARGE	19670501	
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY	AR 635-204	
DISCHARGE REASON	A68.00	
BOARD DECISION	DENY	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.	110.02	
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.