MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:   

	BOARD DATE:          15 December 1999
	DOCKET NUMBER:  AR1999014053

	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. 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 earlier application to correct his records by providing him with basic allowance for quarters (BAQ).

APPLICANT STATES:   In effect, that the case was improperly considered.  If he had been allowed to appear before the Board in person he would have provided information that was not otherwise available or been able to rebut erroneous information.  The Inspector General’s (IG) Office at the Civil Affairs and Psychological Operations Command (Airborne), Fort Bragg, North Carolina supports the applicant’s request.

NEW EVIDENCE OR INFORMATION:  Incorporated herein by reference are military records which were summarized in a memorandum prepared to reflect the Board's previous consideration of the case on 4 February 1998 (COPY ATTACHED).

The IG’s memorandum is new argument that requires Board consideration.

The IG’s memorandum contends that the Board’s conclusions are ambiguous and speculative and prejudicial.  It also states that “The guidance from this office where there is no evidence to the contrary and where there is no bearing on the good order and discipline of the Army; we will substantiate upon the side of the soldier.”

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 Board receives over 15,000 applications each year, but normally grants fewer than fifteen formal hearings a year.  Formal hearings are granted only when the Board determines that a case is so complex, the records so incomplete, or that only sworn testimony can provide the necessary information.  The Board did not view this case as so complicated that a hearing was necessary.  The applicant contends that he would provide additional evidence or offer a rebuttal to erroneous information but he has not yet done so.  

2.  The fact that the Board did not reach the conclusion the applicant sought does not mean that his case was improperly considered.  Expressions of dissatisfaction with previous decisions, contentions, unsubstantiated assertions, interpretations and argument (except that which sets forth a new factual basis for the requested relief) are not evidence and do not warrant consideration by the Board.

3.  Quite aside from the fact that there is evidence contrary to the applicant’s assertions in this case, the IG’s policy is moot.  This Board must presume regularity unless the evidence establishes, in the Board’s opinion, that an error of an injustice has occurred.  Furthermore, a soldier receiving payments that he is not entitled to is a matter of good order and discipline.  

4.  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.

5.  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.

6.  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	AR19990024053	
SUFFIX		
RECON		
DATE BOARDED	19991215	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE		
DATE OF DISCHARGE		
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY		
DISCHARGE REASON		
BOARD DECISION	DENY	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.	128.12	
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.