MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:   

	BOARD DATE:            24 May 2000                  
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR2000041707

	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. Wanda L. Waller		Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Mr. John N. Slone 		Chairperson	
	Mr. Mark D. Manning 		Member	
	Ms. Meta Waller 		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 be upgraded to general.  

APPLICANT STATES:  In effect, that his discharge be upgraded to at least a general for entitlement to medical treatment and educational benefits.   

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

The applicant enlisted on 18 September 1990 for a period of 4 years.  He served as a combat engineer in Southwest Asia from 3 February 1991 through 15 May 1991.

On 21 February 1992, the applicant was convicted by a general court-martial of five specifications of dishonorably failing to maintain sufficient funds for payment upon presentation and 34 specifications of uttering worthless checks with intent to defraud.  He was sentenced to a dishonorable discharge, confinement for
3 years, forfeiture of all pay and allowances and reduction to E-1.  On 20 May 1992 the convening authority approved the sentence.

On 17 November 1992 the Army Court of Military Review affirmed the findings of guilty and the sentence.  His appellate review was completed on 4 June 1993.

Accordingly, the applicant was discharged pursuant to the sentence of a general
court-martial on 2 July 1993.  He had served 1 year, 5 months, and 3 days of total active service and had 496 days lost due to confinement.   

The applicant’s DD Form 214 shows his character of service as “BAD CONDUCT”.  There is no evidence in the applicant’s records which shows his dishonorable discharge was mitigated to a bad conduct discharge.  The Army Clemency and Parole Board reviewed the applicant’s case three times and clemency was denied on each occasion.  

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 Board noted the applicant’s request to have his bad conduct discharge upgraded to at least a general discharge.  The Board also noted that the applicant’s discharge document reflects a bad conduct discharge.  However, evidence of record shows the applicant was sentenced to a dishonorable discharge, not a bad conduct discharge.

2.  The applicant’s request that his discharge be upgraded to a general discharge for entitlement to medical treatment and educational benefits was noted by the Board.  However, the Board does not grant relief solely for the purpose of obtaining eligibility for medical treatment or educational benefits.

3.  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.  

4.  The type of discharge directed and the reasons therefore were appropriate considering all of the facts of the case.

5.  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.

6.  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

JNS____  MDM____  MW______  DENY APPLICATION

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

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2000041707	
SUFFIX		
RECON		
DATE BOARDED	20000524	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE	(BCD)	
DATE OF DISCHARGE	19930702	
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY	AR 635-200  	
DISCHARGE REASON	As a result of a court-martial	
BOARD DECISION	(DENY)	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.	110.0200	
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.