MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:   

	BOARD DATE:           22 September 1999                   
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR1998013036

	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. Loren G. Harrell		Director	
	Mrs. Nancy Amos		Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Ms. Margaret K. Patterson		Chairperson	
	Mr. Curtis L. Greenway		Member	
	Mr. John P. Infante		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 grade of Staff Sergeant (SSG), E-6 be restored.

APPLICANT STATES:  That the Article 15 suspended his reduction but finance erroneously reduced him.

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

He enlisted in the Regular Army on 20 June 1989.  He was promoted to SSG effective 1 November 1995.  

On 19 August 1996, the applicant was a self-referral to the Ansbach Community Counseling Center where it was determined he had an alcohol problem.  He completed the formal treatment program and began participating in the year-long aftercare program.  He deployed to Bosnia on 23 November 1996 with the understanding he was still enrolled in Track III.

The applicant had no record of disciplinary action until he accepted non-judicial punishment under Article 15, Uniform Code of Military Justice on 29 May 1997 for violating a lawful general order by consuming alcoholic beverages at a downtown café.  His punishment was a reduction to Sergeant (SGT), E-5, forfeiture of $757.00 pay for 2 months, suspended, and extra duty for 45 days.  He appealed the punishment and signed the appeal as a SGT, E-5.  His appeal was denied on 11 June 1997.

On an unknown date, the applicant’s commander recommended him for separation under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 9 for alcohol abuse rehabilitation failure.  He acknowledged receipt of the proposed separation on 14 July 1997.  He signed the acknowledgement as a SGT, E-5.  He waived consideration of his case by an administrative board, waived consulting counsel and did not submit a statement in his own behalf.  

On 9 August 1997, the applicant was discharged, with an honorable discharge, under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, Chapter 9.  His DD Form 214 shows his grade as SGT, E-5 with a date of rank of 29 May 1997 (the date his Article 15 punishment was imposed).

In the processing of this case, an advisory opinion was obtained from the legal advisor to the Army Review Boards Agency.  The legal advisor opined that the applicant failed to produce credible evidence to support his contention that the reduction from SSG to SGT was suspended in conjunction with the forfeiture imposed during the 29 May 1997 Article 15 proceedings.

A copy of the advisory opinion was provided to the applicant for comment or rebuttal.  He did not respond within the given time frame.
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, 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.  The evidence of record shows that while the Article 15 punishment of the forfeiture was suspended, the punishment of the reduction to SGT was not.

3.  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

__mkp___  __clg___  __jpi___  DENY APPLICATION

						Loren G. Harrell
						Director

INDEX

CASE ID	AR1998013036	
SUFFIX		
RECON		
DATE BOARDED	19990922	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE		
DATE OF DISCHARGE		
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY		
DISCHARGE REASON		
BOARD DECISION	(DENY)	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.	129.06	
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.