MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:	

	BOARD DATE:             9 November 1999
	DOCKET NUMBER:	AR1999014852

	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	
	Mr. W. W. Osborn, Jr.		Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Mr. Raymond V. O'Connor, Jr.		Chairperson	
	Ms. Celia L. Adolphi		Member	
	Ms. Karen Y. Fletcher		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, reconsideration of his previous application to correct his records by  upgrading his discharge.

APPLICANT STATES:  In effect, that at the discharge was too harsh and that he was punished for being an alcoholic. 

NEW EVIDENCE OR INFORMATION:  The applicant’s case is reopened in accordance with the Army Board for Correction of Military Records Reconsideration Project (ABCMR-RP) criteria.  Incorporated herein by reference are military records which were summarized in a memorandum prepared to reflect the Board's original consideration of his case on 19 August 198 (COPY ATTACHED).  The applicant’s interim requests were administratively closed.

In 1986 the applicant had submitted documents relating to post service behavior and conduct, but offered no argument that these factors warranted the requested relief.  He currently submits a letter from a Vietnam Veterans of America chapter to the effect that the applicant supports that organization's work with underprivileged children.  These documents, taken together, are accepted as an implied post service adjustment argument.  Board consideration is appropriate.

The documents preciously submitted consist of a 23 July 1984 certificate from the Berkshire Council on Alcoholism and Addictions attesting to the completion of a extended care rehabilitation program and a 20 September 1984 letter from the Executive Director of that organization to the effect that for the past year the applicant had done an excellent job as an employee.  He was highly recommended  for future employment.  Another employer wrote that the applicant had been reliable and conscientious and would be re-hired upon request.  Yet a third employer stated that the applicant had served well as a custodian for almost a year and was recommended for any future employment.  The applicant, himself, wrote in October 1996 that he had been trying to get sober for about 3 years and that an upgrade would benefit him because then he could get help with his alcoholism from the VA.

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 efforts to achieve sobriety and the support of organizations and individuals are noted but these factors are not so exceptionally meritorious as to warrant the requested relief, especially in the absence of more recent evidence as to the progress of his recovery and his participation in his community.

3.  The overall merits of the case, including the latest submissions and arguments are insufficient as a basis for the Board to reverse its previous decision.

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

_rvo_____  __cla___  __kyf____  DENY APPLICATION

						Loren G. Harrell
						Director

INDEX

CASE ID	AR1999014852	
SUFFIX		
RECON		
DATE BOARDED	19991109	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE	UD	
DATE OF DISCHARGE	199680329	
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY	AR635-200, ch10	
DISCHARGE REASON	A70.00	
BOARD DECISION	UD 3-0	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES        1.	108.04	
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.