MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:      

	BOARD DATE:            28 AUGUST 2001
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR2001056194

	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. Gale J. Thomas		Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Mr. John N. Slone		Chairperson	
	Mr. Richard T. Dunbar		Member	
	Mr. Donald P. Hupman, Jr.		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 (BCD) be upgraded.

APPLICANT STATES:  That his discharge should be upgraded because of his years of service. 

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

On 10 January 1975 he enlisted in the Regular Army for a period of three years.

The applicant was promoted to the pay grades of E-3, E-4, and E-5, on               3 February 1976, 5 August 1976, and 19 November 1979, respectively.

On 9 February 1981, he accepted nonjudicial punishment (NJP) under the provisions of Article 15, Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) for disobeying  two lawful orders from a superior commissioned officer, and for operating a motor vehicle in a reckless manner on two occasions by driving down the center of the road causing danger to oncoming traffic, and on another occasion by driving with his headlights off.  His punishment was reduction to pay grade E-4, extra duty, and restriction.

On 10 February 1981, he accepted NJP under the provisions of Article 15, UCMJ for failure to go to his appointed place of duty.  His punishment was reduction to pay grade E-3, extra duty and restriction.

On 18 August 1982, he accepted NJP under the provisions of Article 15, UCMJ for the wrongful possession of drug paraphernalia.  His punishment was reduction to pay grade E-1, a forfeiture, suspended for 6 months, and extra duty.

On 22 February 1983, the applicant was convicted by a special court-martial of  
being absent without leave (AWOL) from 26-27 October 1982, attempting to steal currency of a value of about $900.00 from the DV Exchange Bank in Frankfurt, Germany, and of falsely altering a check payable to himself, in the amount of $20.00 adding the number “9” in front of the said $20.00, in an attempt to defraud the U.S. Government in the amount of $900.00.  He was sentenced to a forfeiture, confinement at hard labor for three months, and to be discharged from the service with a bad conduct discharge.  The sentence was affirmed by the United States Army Court of Military Review on 31 August 1983.

On 19 January 1984, the applicant was separated under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 3, with a bad conduct discharge.  His DD Form
214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) indicates he had        6 years, 7 months and 5 days of active service and 73 days of lost time.

Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel.  Chapter 3 provides that a soldier will be given a BCD pursuant only to an approved sentence of a general or special court-martial. The appellate review must be completed and the affirmed sentence ordered duly executed.

Army Regulation 635-200 also states that an honorable discharge is a separation with honor.  The honorable characterization is appropriate when the quality of the soldier’s service generally has met the standards of acceptable conduct and performance of duty for Army personnel, or is otherwise so meritorious that any other characterization would be clearly inappropriate.

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. 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 to show that there was an error or injustice in this case.

2.  Trial by court-marital 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.  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       __RTD __  __DPH __  DENY APPLICATION

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

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2001056194	
SUFFIX		
RECON	YYYYMMDD	
DATE BOARDED	20010828	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE	(HD, GD, UOTHC, UD, BCD, DD, UNCHAR)	
DATE OF DISCHARGE	YYYYMMDD	
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY	AR .  .  .  .  .  	
DISCHARGE REASON		
BOARD DECISION	DENY	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.	110.00	
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.