APPLICANT REQUESTS:  That his bad conduct discharge (BCD) be upgraded.

APPLICANT STATES:  In effect, that although he accepts responsibility for his AWOL offenses, he lacked maturity and dedication.  He also cites a presidential pardon and clemency discharge under Presidential Proclamation 4313 in which he received on 18 August 1975.  He is currently working in armed robbery prevention for a major supermarket chain and holds a Pennsylvania Act 235 Lethal Weapon Certification as well as a Philadelphia Concealer carry permit.  He recently applied for work as a police/corrections officer with the city of Philadelphia.  He was told by inside friends that his past mistakes in the Army are the reason why neither agency will hire him.

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

He was born on 4 September 1948.  He enlisted in the Army on 1 November 1965 for three years.  He was awarded military occupation specialty 11B10 (Light Weapons Infantryman).

On 6 October 1983, the applicant enlisted in the Regular Army with the same MOS.  The highest paygrade he achieved was E-4.

On 26 July 1985, the applicant accepted nonjudicial punishment (NJP), under Article 15, Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ), for being absent without leave (AWOL) during the period of 10 July 1985 to 15 July 1985.  His imposed punishment was reduction to paygrade E-3, forfeiture of $185.00 (suspended for 6 months) and confinement for 7 days.

On 18 November 1985, the applicant accepted NJP, under Article 15, UCMJ, for willfully disobeying a superior commissioned officer.  His imposed punishment was reduction to paygrade E-2, 14 days extra duty and 14 days restriction.

On 24 February 1986, the applicant was convicted by a general court-martial of making and uttering 20 worthless checks totaling $1,389.62 and one count of breaking restriction.  His approved sentence was reduction to paygrade E-1, forfeiture of all pay and allowances, confinement for 4 months, and a BCD.

On 12 May 1986, the Court of Military Review, affirmed the findings of guilty and the sentence.

On 21 May 1986, the Court of Military Appeals held the findings of guilty and sentence as approved by the convening authority correct in law and fact.  Accordingly, the findings of guilty and the sentence were affirmed.

On 8 December 1986, the applicant was discharged, in pay grade E-1, under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, Section IV, as a result of a court-martial, under other than honorable conditions with a BCD certificate.  He had completed 3 years, 2 months and 4 days creditable and 90 days of lost time of service.  He was awarded the Army Achievement Medal, Army Service Ribbon, Overseas Service Ribbon, and the Marksmanship Badge (Rifle M-16).

Title 10, United States Code, section 1552, as amended, precludes any action by this Board which would disturb the finality of a court-martial conviction.

DISCUSSION:  Considering all the evidence, allegations, and information presented by the applicant, together with the evidence of record, applicable law and regulations, and advisory opinion(s), 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 that would satisfy the aforementioned requirement.

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

3.  The applicant has submitted neither probative evidence nor a convincing argument in support of his allegation or request.

4.  There is no evidence in the available records to demonstrate that the applicant was the victim of racial prejudice, the evidence does show the applicant to be a Caucasian male.  Therefore, 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

                       DENY APPLICATION




		Loren G. Harrell
		Director