MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:  

	BOARD DATE:  25 January 2001
	DOCKET NUMBER:  AR2000041974

	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. Joyce A. Wright		Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Ms. June Hajjar		Chairperson	
	Ms. Karen A. Heinz		Member	
	Mr. Lester Echols		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 his bad conduct discharge be upgraded and that he be entitled to benefits administered by the Veterans Administration (VA).

APPLICANT STATES:  In effect, that he is unable to receive VA benefits based on the discharge he received.

EVIDENCE OF RECORD:  The applicant's military records show he was inducted on 8 May 1968 as a manual center office repairman.  

The applicant’s personnel records show that he was AWOL from 8 to
12 October 1968 (5 days) and from 5 January 1969 to 8 January 1969 
(4 days) with no record of punishment imposed.

On 27 November 1968, he was punished under Article 15, UCMJ for being AWOL from 27 October to 20 November 1968 (23 days).  His punishment consisted of a reduction to the pay grade of E-1 and a forfeiture of pay.

He was convicted by a general court-martial on 23 January 1970 for being AWOL from 9 February to 2 November 1969 (266 days).  His sentence consisted of reduction to the pay grade of E-1, forfeiture of all pay and allowances, confinement at hard labor for 9 months, and a bad conduct discharge.  The sentence was approved on 2 February 1970.

While in confinement, he was convicted by a special court-martial on 24 February 1970 for assault.  His sentence consisted of confinement at hard labor for
6 months, a forfeiture of pay, and reduction to the lowest enlisted grade. The sentence was approved on 4 March 1970.

On 25 February 1970, the Court of Military Review affirmed the findings and sentence of the general court-martial conviction as approved by the convening authority.

While in confinement, he was convicted by a general court-martial on 29 April 1970 for making false statements and three specifications of perjuring himself.
His sentence consisted of confinement at hard labor for 6 months and a dishonorable discharge.  The sentence was approved on 16 June 1970.

On 11 June 1974, the applicant was discharged from the Army pursuant to the sentence of a general court-martial and was issued a Bad Conduct Discharge Certificate.  He had served 7 months and 25 days of creditable service and had 622 days of lost time due to AWOL and confinement.  The dishonorable discharge was not implemented.

Army Regulation 635-200, in effect, at the time, set forth the basic authority for
the separation of enlisted personnel.  Paragraph 11-1 of the regulation provided, in pertinent part, that an enlisted person will be given a bad conduct discharge pursuant only to an approved sentence of a general or special court-martial.  

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 notes the applicant’s contentions that he is unable to receive VA benefits based on the discharge he received.  The Board also notes that the applicant accumulated 622 days of lost time due to AWOL and confinement.

2.  The applicant has provided no evidence to show that his discharge was unjust and should be upgraded.  He also has not provided any evidence to mitigate the character of his discharge.  

3.  While the Board is empathetic, it does not upgrade discharges for the purposes of obtaining eligibility for benefits.

4.  Trial by court-martial was warranted by the gravity of the offense charged.  Conviction and discharge were effected in accordance with applicable law and regulation.

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 this 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

__jh____  __kh___  __le______  DENY APPLICATION

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

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2000041974	
SUFFIX		
RECON	YYYYMMDD	
DATE BOARDED	20010125	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE	BCD	
DATE OF DISCHARGE	19700921	
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY	AR .635-200  C, 11	
DISCHARGE REASON		
BOARD DECISION	DENY	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.  189		
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.		

.