MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:       

	BOARD DATE:                       1 August 2000
	DOCKET NUMBER:              AR1999034863

	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:

	Ms. Deborah S. Jacobs		Chairperson	
	Mr. Ernest W. Lutz		Member	
	Ms. Karol A. Kennedy		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:  Correction of item 28 (Narrative Reason for Separation) of his DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) to show “secretarial authority” instead of “as a result of court-martial”.

APPLICANT STATES:  In effect, that his narrative reason for separation should be changed to secretarial authority.  In support of his application he submits a copy of his DD Form 214 and a copy of his Army Discharge Review Board (ADRB) case report.

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

He entered active duty on 9 July 1987 as a combat engineer.

He was convicted by a general court-martial on 9 December 1988 for being absent from his appointed place of duty, for being disrespectful toward a commissioned officer, for disobeying a lawful order from a commissioned officer
and noncommissioned officer, for destruction of government property and for wrongfully communicating a threat to a commissioned officer.  His sentence consisted of a reduction to the pay grade of E-1, a forfeiture of pay, confinement for 4 months and a Bad Conduct Discharge.  The sentence was adjudged and approved on 9 December 1988.

The applicant underwent a mental status evaluation 6 January 1989, which determined that he could distinguish right from wrong and that he possessed sufficient mental capacity to participate in administrative or judicial proceedings.

The applicant underwent a separation medical examination on 6 January 1989 and was found qualified for separation.

On 2 June 1989, the Court of Military Review affirmed the findings and sentence as provided by the convening authority.

On 15 September 1989, the applicant was discharged from the Army pursuant to the sentence of a special court-martial and was issued a Bad Conduct Discharge
Certificate.  

The applicant applied to the Army Discharge Review Board (ADRB) for an upgrade of his discharge on 26 September 1996.  The ADRB carefully reviewed the applicant’s military record and post service accomplishments and found that clemency was warranted.  However, the Board determined that the applicant’s

misconduct diminished the quality of his service below that meriting a fully 
honorable characterization of service.  Accordingly, the Board voted to upgrade the applicant’s characterization of service to general, under honorable conditions. A change in the reason for discharge is not authorized under Federal statute.

Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel.  Section IV, Paragraph 3-11 states that a soldier will be given a bad conduct discharge 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.

Section II, Paragraph 5-3 of Army Regulation 635-200 states that separation for the convenience of the Government is the prerogative of the Secretary of the Army (SA).  Except as delegated by this regulation or by special DA directives, it will be accomplished only by the SA’s authority.  The separation of any soldier of the Army under this authority will be based on a SA determination that separation is in the best interests of the Army.  

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 regulation.

2.  The Board noted the decision by the ADRB to change the characterization of service to honorable.  The Board also noted that a change in the reason for discharge is not authorized under Federal statute. Therefore, the applicant is not entitled to a change in his narrative reason for discharge.  

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:

_DSJ___  EWL____  KAK_____  GRANT

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

________  ________  ________  DENY APPLICATION

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

INDEX

CASE ID	AR1999034863	
SUFFIX		
RECON	YYYYMMDD	
DATE BOARDED	20000801	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE	BCD	
DATE OF DISCHARGE	19890915	
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY	AR 635-200, chapter 3	
DISCHARGE REASON		
BOARD DECISION	DENY	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.  189 (BCD)		
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.