MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:	 

	BOARD DATE:            15 December 1999
	DOCKET NUMBER:	AR1999019853

	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. Gerald E. Vandenberg		Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Mr. Thomas N. Kuhn		Chairperson	
	Ms. Elizabeth Buchanon		Member	
	Mr. Mark D. Manning		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 previous application to correct his records by removing the Officer Evaluation Reports for the periods 6 December 1985 to 5 December 1986 and 6 December 1986 to 15 July 1987, by removal of all documents relating to this action and by promoting to colonel as of the date he first entered the promotion zone.
APPLICANT STATES:  In effect, that his case is covered by the regulations pertaining to whistle blowers.  He contends that the OERs were written in retaliation for his disagreements with his superiors and his reporting of improper acts.
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 consideration of his case on 8 January 1992 and 23 June 1993 (COPIES ATTACHED). 
The applicant submits an extensive packet of information, while the majority of the information, documentation and arguments have been before the Board previously, it could not be determined if the Board had the opportunity to review all of the evidence in its prior reviews.  Further, the issue of protection as a whistle blower was not specifically addressed, therefore, it is appropriate to forward the entire packet to the Board of its review. 
The majority of the applicant’s contentions are basically disagreement with the decisions of the boards that have reviewed his case.  The applicant has submitted no substantive or supportive evidence of improper or inappropriate action in the processing of his case.   Expressions of dissatisfaction with previous decisions, contentions, unsubstantiated assertions, interpretations and argument, (except those that set forth a new factual basis for the requested relief) do not warrant reconsideration by the Board.
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 has failed to submit any documentation that would substantiate that his adverse OERs were in retribution to any complaint of mismanagement or inappropriate actions on the part of members of his chain of command. 

2.  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.  There is no evidence to show that the applicant was ever afforded whistle blower status.

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

__TNK__  ___EB_  _  ___MDM_  DENY APPLICATION

						Loren G. Harrell
						Director

INDEX
CASE ID	AR1999019853	
SUFFIX		
RECON	 	
DATE BOARDED	19991215                                                                                      	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE	 	
DATE OF DISCHARGE	 	
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY	AR . . . . .  	
DISCHARGE REASON		
BOARD DECISION		
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES        1.	111.01	
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.