MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

IN THE CASE OF:       

BOARD DATE:            9 December 1999                  
DOCKET NUMBER:   AR1999020696

	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:

	Ms. JoAnn H. Langston		Chairperson	
	Mr. Thomas D. Howard, Jr.		Member	
	Mr. James P. Steuve		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.  He also requests that his records be corrected to show that he had only 30 days of AWOL and to have his Report of Separation (DD Form 214) include his period of overseas service.  

APPLICANT STATES:  In effect, that after 41 years of being a credible, dependable, responsible and law biding man he should be granted an upgrade of his discharge.  He avers that he served in the Reserves for three years following his 1950 discharge.  He further states that he was being evaluated for medical conditions at the time of 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 original consideration of his case on 7 March 1962 (COPY ATTACHED).

The applicant’s request is for all intents and purposes identical to his prior request.  He does submit 6 personal references attesting to his post service character and conduct and a copy of a Fellowship Card indicating that he is an ordained minister in the Pentecostal Church.  These documents were not available to the Board previously; this constitutes new evidence that requires Board review.

Block 24 of the applicant’s DD Form 214 shows his overseas service as requested therefore, no action is necessary.  The notation, in Block 32, of 323 days lost is the combination of 6 periods, totaling 162 days, of AWOL and 198 days of confinement.  The abbreviation ‘AW’ is used to denote ‘in accordance with’ paragraph 107 and not to denote AWOL.   Since there is no error in these items the Board will take no action on these issues.

Army Regulation 635-40, paragraph 4-1, provides that a member who is under investigation for or charged with an offense for which he could be dismissed or given a punitive discharge may not be referred for disability processing.  However, if the officer exercising appropriate court-martial jurisdiction dismisses the charge or refers it for trial to a court-martial which cannot adjudge such a sentence, the case may be referred for disability processing.  When forwarded, the records of such a case must contain a copy of the action signed by the court-martial authority who made the decision.

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 submitted no evidence to verify any period of service other than 10 July 1946 to 3 February 1950. 

2.  There is no evidence that the applicant was being evaluated for a consideration of physical disability retirement or separation nor does the record show that he was unable to perform his duties due to a medical condition.  Further, even had such a finding been made due to his facing charges he would have been precluded from such a consideration.

3.  The applicant’s post-service conduct and achievements are not so outstanding or exemplary in nature as to outweigh the offences that resulted in his general court-martial and dishonorable discharge.

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

___jhl___  ____tdh__  __jps____  DENY APPLICATION

						Loren G. Harrell
						Director

INDEX

CASE ID	AR1999020696	
SUFFIX		
RECON		
DATE BOARDED	19991209	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE		
DATE OF DISCHARGE		
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY		
DISCHARGE REASON		
BOARD DECISION	DENY	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.	105.01	
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.