MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:  

	BOARD DATE:  12 April 2001
	DOCKET NUMBER:  AR2001052285

	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. Roger W. Able		Chairperson	
	Mr. Donald P. Hupman		Member	
	Mr. Richard T. Dunbar		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 an
honorable discharge.

APPLICANT STATES:  That he believes that his discharge should be upgraded because of his rank and time in service and that he was attempting to make the Army a career.  He also states that he assisted a fellow soldier in turning himself in from AWOL; however, the fellow soldier attempted to rob another soldier while riding with him in his car and that they were both charged with robbery.  In support of his application he submits a copy of his DD Forms 214.

EVIDENCE OF RECORD:  The applicant's military records show he enlisted in the Kentucky Army National Guard (KYARNG) on 11 April 1973 as a Redeye gunner.  He was ordered to active duty for training (ADT) and was released from ADT on 26 August 1973 and was returned to control of the KYARNG to complete his remaining service obligation.  He enlisted in the Regular Army on 12 June 1974 as a unit supply specialist.  

On 19 September 1974, he was punished under Article 15, UCMJ, for being AWOL from 13 September to 16 September 1974 (3 days).  His punishment consisted of a verbal reprimand.

On 9 September 1975, he was punished under Article 15, UCMJ, for disrespect toward a commissioned officer.  His punishment consisted of a forfeiture of pay and 10 days extra duty.

He was convicted by a general court-martial on 19 November 1975 of robbery.
His sentence consisted of a reduction to the lowest enlisted grade, forfeiture of all pay and allowances, confinement at hard labor for 2 years, and a bad conduct discharge.  The sentence was adjudged on 19 November 1975 and approved on 29 January 1976.  On that same day, the sentence for confinement at hard labor for 2 years was suspended for 12 months.

The applicant underwent a separation medical examination on 8 April 1976
and was found qualified for separation.

The Court of Military Review reviewed the applicant’s case on 29 December 1976 and affirmed so much of the sentence as provided for the bad conduct discharge, reduction to the pay grade of E-1, and confinement at hard labor for
2 years (in excess of 6 months suspended for 12 months).

On 26 April 1977, 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 2 years, 3 months, and 14 days of creditable service and more than 200 days of lost time due to AWOL and confinement.

Army Regulation 635-200, in effect, at the time, set forth the basic authority for
the separation of enlisted personnel.  Paragraph 11-2 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, after completion of appellate review and after such affirmed sentence has been ordered duly executed.

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; however, there is no evidence in the available records, and the applicant has provided no evidence, to support his contentions or to show that his discharge was unjust and should be upgraded.  The Board also notes that he has not provided any evidence to mitigate the character of his discharge.

2.  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.

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 this 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

__ra___  ___dh__  __rd_____  DENY APPLICATION

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

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2001052285	
SUFFIX		
RECON	YYYYMMDD	
DATE BOARDED	20010412	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE	BCD	
DATE OF DISCHARGE	YYYYMMDD	
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY	AR 635-200, 11-2 	
DISCHARGE REASON		
BOARD DECISION	DENY	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.  189.		
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.