MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:       

	BOARD DATE:            26 October 2000
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR2000041699

	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. Carl W. S. Chun		Director	
	Ms. Deyon D. Battle		Analyst	

The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Ms. Melinda M. Darby		Chairperson	
	Mr. Arthur A. Omartian		Member	
	Mr. William D. Powers		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 a general discharge.

APPLICANT STATES:  That during his court-martial proceedings all of the evidence presented against him was told by the people who testified against him. He states that it was their word against his and he believes he is entitled to a general discharge.

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

On 17 April 1979, he enlisted in the Army for 3 years in the pay grade of E-1.  He successfully completed his training as a tactical communications systems operations mechanic.  He remained on active duty through a series of continuous reenlistments.  On 19 December 1984, he was promoted to the pay grade of E-6.

The available records show that on 3 November 1989, while serving as a drill sergeant, the applicant was convicted by a general court-martial of three specifications of committing indecent assaults upon two different privates (E-1); of dereliction of duty; of wrongfully engaging in social fraternization with a private (E-2); and of three specifications of wrongfully engaging in social fraternization with privates (E-1).  His sentence consisted of reduction to the lowest enlisted pay grade, confinement for 3 years and a BCD.

The convening authority approved only so much of the sentence as provided for confinement for 1 year and 6 months, reduction to the lowest enlisted pay grade and a BCD.

Accordingly, on 24 May 1991, the applicant was discharged under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 3-11 as a result of a court-martial conviction.  He had completed 11 years and 1 day of total active service and he was furnished a BCD.

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 actions by the Army in this case were proper, and there is no doubt to be resolved in favor of the applicant.

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’s contentions have been noted by the Board.  However, the fact that all of the evidence presented against him was told by the people who testified against him is not a sufficient basis for upgrading his discharge.  Clearly, he was convicted by a general court-martial after clear and convincing testimony was provided during his trial.  Considering his numerous acts of misconduct, his BCD appears to be appropriate.

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 this 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

___mmd_  ___ao___  ___wdp__  DENY APPLICATION

						Carl W. S. Chun
				     Director, Army Board for Correction
					        of Military Records

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2000041699	
SUFFIX		
RECON	YYYYMMDD	
DATE BOARDED	2000/10/26	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE	BCD	
DATE OF DISCHARGE	1991/05/24	
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY	AR 635-200	
DISCHARGE REASON	675	
BOARD DECISION	DENY	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.  678	144.6803	
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.