MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:     

	BOARD DATE:           21 November 2000
	DOCKET NUMBER:  AR2000047445

	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:

	Mr.  Thomas A. Pagan		Chairperson	
	Mr. Thomas E. O’Shaughnessy		Member	
	Mr. Roger W. Able		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 a general discharge.

APPLICANT STATES:  In effect, that it has been 6 years and that his bad conduct discharge should be upgraded.  In support of his application he submits a copy of his DD Form 293 (Application for the Review of Discharge or Dismissal from the Armed Forces of the United States) and a copy of his DD Form 214.

EVIDENCE OF RECORD:  The applicant's military records show he entered
active duty on 20 August 1990 as a light weapons infantryman.  The applicant was separated on temporary records and an affidavit.

The facts and circumstances pertaining to the applicant’s discharge are not present in the available records.  However, his DD Form 214 shows that on 29 May 1984, he was discharged under the provisions of Army Regulation
635-200, chapter 3-11, pursuant to an approved sentence of a general or special court-martial.  He was furnished a Bad Conduct Discharge Certificate.  He had a total of 1 year, 11 months and 15 days of creditable service and 
643 days of lost time due to AWOL.

The applicant applied to the Army Discharge Review Board (ADRB) on 
17 August 2000.  However, his case was ineligible for review by the ADRB due to his conviction by a general court-martial.  The Board accepted his application to the ADRB in lieu of a DD Form 149.

Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel.  Paragraph 3-11 of that regulation provides that a soldier 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 noted the applicant’s contention that it has been 6 years since his discharge and that his bad conduct discharge should be upgraded.  However, the Board also noted that the applicant accumulated over 643 days of lost time while in the service.  

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

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 regulation.

4.  In the absence of evidence to the contrary, it must be presumed that the applicant’s administrative separation was accomplished in compliance with applicable regulations with no procedural errors, which would tend to jeopardize his rights.  

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:

TAP____  TEO_____  RWA___  GRANT

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

________  ________  ________  DENY APPLICATION

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

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2000047445	
SUFFIX		
RECON	YYYYMMDD	
DATE BOARDED	20001121	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE	BCD	
DATE OF DISCHARGE	19940513	
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY	AR 635-200, chapter 3	
DISCHARGE REASON		
BOARD DECISION	DENY	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.  110 (BCD)		
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.