RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


      IN THE CASE OF:


      BOARD DATE:            25 MAY 2006
      DOCKET NUMBER:   AR20050015095


      I certify that hereinafter is recorded the true and complete record
of the proceedings of the Army Board for Correction of Military Records in
the case of the above-named individual.

|     |Mr. Carl W. S. Chun               |     |Director             |
|     |Mr. Jessie B. Strickland          |     |Analyst              |


      The following members, a quorum, were present:

|     |Mr. William Blakely               |     |Chairperson          |
|     |Mr. Robert Osborn                 |     |Member               |
|     |Mr. Jerome Pionk                  |     |Member               |

      The Board considered the following evidence:

      Exhibit A - Application for correction of military records.

      Exhibit B - Military Personnel Records (including advisory opinion,
if any).

THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE:

1.  The applicant requests that his bad conduct discharge (BCD) be
upgraded.

2.  The applicant provides no explanation as to why his discharge should be
upgraded.

3.  The applicant provides a copy of a Department of Veterans Affairs (VA)
Rating Decision dated 2 December 2004, which grants him a non-service
connected pension.

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  He enlisted in Ashland, Kentucky, on 1 August 1972 for a period of 2
years.  He completed his training as a light weapons infantryman and was
transferred to Korea on 8 January 1973.  He was advanced to the pay grade
of E-3 on 1 August 1973 and completed his tour in Korea on 27 January 1974,
at which time he was transferred to Fort Hood, Texas.

2.  On 17 June 1974, he reenlisted for a period of 5 years and a selective
reenlistment bonus (SRB).  He was advanced to the pay grade of E-4 on 9
July 1974 and on 19 October 1975, he was transferred to Germany.

3.  On 24 November 1975, nonjudicial punishment (NJP) was imposed against
him for being derelict in the performance of his duties.  His punishment
consisted of a forfeiture of pay, extra duty, restriction and reduction to
the pay grade of E-3 (suspended for 30 days).  He appealed his punishment
and the appeal authority set aside the forfeiture of pay on 5 December
1975.

4.  He remained in Germany until he was returned to Fort Hood with his unit
on 13 April 1976.  On 15 June 1976, NJP was imposed against him for failure
to go to his place of duty.  His punishment consisted of restriction, extra
duty, a forfeiture of pay and a reduction to the pay grade of E-3
(suspended for 30 days). He appealed the punishment and the appeal
authority granted part of his appeal by setting aside one-half of the extra
duty and restriction.

5.  On 8 February 1977, he was convicted by a general court-martial of one
specification of the wrongful sale of a controlled substance (codeine), of
two specifications of the wrongful possession of a controlled substance
(codeine), and of one specification of attempting to wrongfully sell a
controlled substance (codeine).  He was sentenced to be discharged with a
BCD, to be confined at hard labor for 18 months, to forfeit all pay and
allowances and to be reduced to the pay grade of E-1.

6.  On 14 October 1977, the United States Army Court of Military Review
affirmed the findings and sentence.

7.  On 31 March 1978, the applicant was discharged pursuant to a duly
reviewed and affirmed court-martial conviction.  He had served 4 years, 4
months and 29 days of total active service and had 477 days of lost time
due to confinement by military authorities.

8.  The VA Rating Decision provided by the applicant shows that the VA
granted him a non-service connected pension effective 26 July 2004 based on
his service as a veteran during the period of 1 August 1972 to 31 March
1978.

9.  Title 10, United States Code, section 1552, the authority under which
this Board acts, provides, in pertinent part, that the Board is not
empowered to set aside a conviction.  Rather it is only empowered to change
the severity of the sentence imposed in the court-martial process and then
only if clemency is determined to be appropriate.  Clemency is an act of
mercy, or instance of leniency, to moderate the severity of the punishment
imposed.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

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 type of discharge directed and the reasons therefore appear to be
appropriate considering the available facts of the case.

3.  While the applicant has offered no basis for his upgrade, there is no
evidence in the available records that is sufficiently mitigating to
warrant relief when compared to the seriousness of his offenses and his
overall record of service.

4.  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.


BOARD VOTE:

________  ________  ________  GRANT FULL RELIEF

________  ________  ________  GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

___WB__  ___RO __  ___JP___  DENY APPLICATION

BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION:

The evidence presented does not demonstrate the existence of a probable
error or injustice.  Therefore, the Board determined that the overall
merits of this case are insufficient as a basis for correction of the
records of the individual concerned.





                                  ______William Blakely_______
                                            CHAIRPERSON



                                    INDEX

|CASE ID                 |AR20050015095                           |
|SUFFIX                  |                                        |
|RECON                   |                                        |
|DATE BOARDED            |20060525                                |
|TYPE OF DISCHARGE       |(BCD)                                   |
|DATE OF DISCHARGE       |1978/03/31                              |
|DISCHARGE AUTHORITY     |AR 635-200, Para 11-2, SPD-JJD, GCMO    |
|DISCHARGE REASON        |BCD                                     |
|BOARD DECISION          |(DENY)                                  |
|REVIEW AUTHORITY        |AR 15-185                               |
|ISSUES                  |675/A68.00                              |
|1.144.6800              |                                        |
|2.                      |                                        |
|3.                      |                                        |
|4.                      |                                        |
|5.                      |                                        |
|6.                      |                                        |


-----------------------
[pic]