MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:      

	BOARD DATE:           4 April 2002                  
	DOCKET NUMBER:  AR2002066841

	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	
	Mr. Lee Cates		Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Mr. Arthur A. Omartian 		Chairperson	
	Mr. Roger W. Able		Member	
	Ms. Karen Y. Fletcher		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 records be corrected to show that his characterization of service was upgraded to general, under honorable conditions.

APPLICANT STATES: That he has made repeated attempts to obtain a copy of his records, to no avail.  He needs the records so he can be listed at the Texas Unemployment Commission under veteran status. 

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

During the period 16 July to 15 September 1982, he was in the Army Reserve Delayed Enlistment Program.

On 16 September 1982, he enlisted in the Regular Army.  He completed his required training and was awarded military occupational specialty 76W (Petroleum Supply Specialist).  He attained pay grade E-2, effective 16 March 1983.

On 18 November 1983, he was convicted by a Special Court-Martial of conspiring to damage to two of his senior noncommissioned officer’s personal property and of causing $593 and $274 damage, respectively.  His sentence included a reduction to pay grade E-1, forfeiture of $250 pay per month for          3 months, confinement at hard labor (CHL) for 75 days and a bad conduct discharge (BCD).

During the period 18 November 1983 to 19 January 1984, he served his CHL.

On 26 July 1984, his sentence was affirmed and ordered executed.

On 23 August 1984, he was discharged, in pay grade E-1, based on the court-martial sentence.  His separation document indicates he had 1 year, 9 months and 7 days of creditable service and 61 days of lost time.

This Board operates under the standard of presumption of regularity in governmental affairs.  The standard states, in effect, that in the absence of evidence to the contrary, the Board must presume that all actions taken by the military were proper.  There is nothing in the records or in the evidence submitted by the applicant that overcomes this presumption.

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.  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, and the discharge appropriately characterizes the misconduct for which the applicant was convicted.

2.  The characterization of the applicant’s current discharge is appropriate considering all the facts of the case.  There also is no apparent error, injustice, inequity, or change in policy or standards on which to base recharacterization of his discharge to under honorable conditions.

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

_rwa___  _kyf____  _aao___       DENY APPLICATION

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

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2002066841	
SUFFIX		
RECON		
DATE BOARDED	20020404	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE		
DATE OF DISCHARGE		
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY		
DISCHARGE REASON		
BOARD DECISION	DENY	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.	144.00	
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.