MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:      

	BOARD DATE:           21 FEBRUARY 2002
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR2001064473

	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. Kenneth H. Aucock		Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Mr. George D. Paxson		Chairperson	
	Mr. Thomas A. Pagan		Member	
	Mr. Melvin H. Meyer		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 dishonorable discharge be upgraded to general or honorable.  

APPLICANT STATES:  That he served the Army with pride during his career, but made a stupid mistake because of financial difficulties caused by monthly child support payments for two children.  His military record shows that he was a very good soldier.

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

The applicant entered on active duty on 9 March 1976 and remained on continuous active duty until his discharge.  The applicant attained the rank of sergeant first class.  His evaluation reports, other than the last report that he received for the period September 1996 through June 1997, have been excellent and oftentimes outstanding throughout his military career.  His NCO evaluation report ending in June 1997 shows that he admitted to a federal criminal incident and that he went AWOL.  He completed numerous military courses, including the Advanced NCO Course (ANCOC).  The applicant’s medals include three awards of the Army Commendation Medal, two awards of the Army Achievement Medal, and five awards of the Army Good Conduct Medal. 

A 17 October 1997 General Court-Martial Order published by Headquarters, U.S. Army Test and Evaluation Command, Aberdeen Proving Ground, Maryland, shows that the applicant was arraigned at Aberdeen and pled guilty to six counts of larceny, four counts of forgery, eight counts of obtaining services under false pretenses, and AWOL.  The applicant was sentenced to be reduced to the grade of E-1, to be confined for 36 months, and to be dishonorably discharged from the Army. 

A 25 September 1998 General Court-Martial Order published by Headquarters, U.S. Army Armor Training Center and Fort Knox, Fort Knox, Kentucky, remitted five months of the unexecuted portion of the applicant’s sentence to confinement.

Following appellate review of the case, a 28 July 1999 General Court-Martial Order published by the United States Disciplinary Barracks at Fort Leavenworth, Kansas, directed that the dishonorable discharge be executed.  The applicant was discharged on 20 August 1999.

An administrative decision made by a VA Regional Office in Chicago shows that agency determined that the applicant’s character of service for the period            9 March 1976 to 17 August 1992 was honorable for VA purposes; but that his character of service from 18 August 1992 to 20 August 1999 was dishonorable for VA purposes and that he was barred from all VA benefits, to include medical benefits, for that period of service.

Army Regulation 635-200 provides for the separation of enlisted personnel.  Paragraph 3-10 states that a solider will be given a dishonorable discharge pursuant only to an approved sentence of a general court-martial.  The appellate review must be completed and the affirmed sentence order 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 applicant’s service prior to his wrongdoings was creditable.  This factor, however, does not warrant the action requested by the applicant.  He brought discredit to himself and the Army by his actions which resulted in his dishonorable discharge.  

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

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 that 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

___GDP _  __TAP   _  __MHM _  DENY APPLICATION

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

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2001064473	
SUFFIX		
RECON	YYYYMMDD	
DATE BOARDED	20020221	
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.	360.	
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.