MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

IN THE CASE OF:       

BOARD DATE:           22 July 1999                  
DOCKET NUMBER:   AC93-06730E
			   AR1999018642

	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. G. E. Vandenberg		Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Mr. Calvin M. Fowler		Chairperson	
	Mr. Thomas N. Kuhn		Member	
	Mr. Raymond J. Wagner		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: Reconsideration of his application to correct his records by upgrading his discharge.

APPLICANT STATES:  In effect, that he was young and immature and did not fully understand the consequences of his discharge.  He contends that, prior to the incidents that lead to his discharge he had exemplary service, that he was suffering from the affects of alcohol abuse and that his post service conduct demonstrates his overcoming the immaturity that lead to his discharge. 

NEW EVIDENCE OR INFORMATION:  Incorporated herein by reference are military records which were summarized in a memorandum prepared to reflect the Board's considerations of his case on 2 June 1993 and 8 October 1997 (COPIES ATTACHED).

The applicant’s current request incorporates the contentions and arguments of his prior requests.  Additionally, his submission contains documents that include two police reports from the City of Orlando indicating that the applicant has no police record in their jurisdiction.  He also submits six personal references from his minister and companies that are serviced by his cleaning and janitorial service.  All of these letters refer to the applicant as a reliable and responsible individual.  He further submits a letter indicating that he is a student at a local community college and one that indicated that he had previously been attending classes at the seminary.  This documentation was not available to the Board previously, thus constitutes new evidence that requires Board review.

The Manual for Courts-Martial states that voluntary intoxication not amounting to legal insanity, whether caused by alcohol or drugs, is not an excuse for an offense committed while in that condition.  That this standard of conduct is accepted not only by the military but also by society as a whole is demonstrated by the fact that drunk drivers are held legally responsible for the results of their behavior even though they are shown to be alcoholic.

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 indication that he has adjusted to society and found a place where he can be an asset is noted, however, neither his military service nor his post service adjustment are of such a meritorious or exemplary nature as to out weigh his misconduct.

2.  An indication that intoxication is a legally inadequate defense, both in the military and in society as a whole, is demonstrated by the fact that drunk drivers are held legally responsible for the results of their behavior even though they are shown to be alcoholic. 

3.  The applicant's contention that he was young and immature at the time is not sufficiently mitigating to warrant relief.  The Board notes that the applicant was almost 21 years of age at the time of his special court-martial for AWOL and had successfully completed basic training and Advanced infantry training without incident.

4. 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.

5.  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

___CMF_  ___TNK_  ___RJW__  DENY APPLICATION

						Loren G. Harrell
						Director

INDEX

CASE ID	AC93-06730E
AR1999018642	
SUFFIX		
RECON	 	
DATE BOARDED	 19990722	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE	 	
DATE OF DISCHARGE	 	
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY	   . . . .  	
DISCHARGE REASON		
BOARD DECISION	DENY	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.	110	
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.