MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:   

	BOARD DATE:            9 November 2000                  
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR2000046424

	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. Carl W. S. Chun		Director	
	Mr. W. W. Osborn, Jr.		Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Ms. Jennifer L. Prater		Chairperson	
	Mr. Orville W. Troesch, Jr.		Member	
	Ms. Barbara J. Lutz		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 appeal to correct his military records by upgrading his discharge to honorable.

APPLICANT STATES:  In effect, that “copies of several of my citizen duties, disabilities and police record” demonstrate that his post-service adjustment and conduct warrant the requested relief.
 
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 (AR1999030379) on 15 February 2000.

The applicant’s submission is new evidence and argument that requires Board consideration.

A 22 June 2000 subpoena issued by the California Board of Prison Terms shows that the applicant was summoned to testify as a witness in a parole violation hearing.  A jury summons and associated documents shows he served as a juror for 12 days during July 2000.  Various documents show he is the registered owner of two firearms.  A 27 June 2000 letter from an attorney shows that the applicant was appealing the administrative law judge’s decision in his Social Security Administration disability case.  A City of Long Beach Police Department letter indicates that the applicant has no local criminal record.

Army Regulation15-185 sets forth the policy and procedures for the ABCMR.  It provides that, if a request for a reconsideration is received within one year of the prior consideration and the case has not been previously reconsidered, it will be resubmitted to the Board if there is evidence (including but not limited to any facts or arguments as to why relief should be granted) that was not in the record at the time of the Board’s prior consideration.  The staff of the Board is authorized to determine whether or not such evidence had been submitted.

The regulation provides further guidance for reconsideration requests that are received more than 1 year after the Board’s original consideration or after the Board has already reconsidered the case.  In such cases, the staff of the Board will review the request to determine if substantial relevant evidence has been submitted that shows fraud, mistake in law, mathematical miscalculation, manifest error, or if there exists substantial relevant new evidence discovered contemporaneously or within a short time after the Board’s original decision.  If the staff finds such evidence, the case will be resubmitted to the Board.  If no such evidence is found, the application will be returned without action.

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 evidence of the applicant’s post-service adjustment and conduct are noted.  However, these matters are not so exceptionally meritorious as to demonstrate an injustice in the discharge.
 
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.

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

__JLP___  __OWT__  __BJL___  DENY APPLICATION

	Carl W. S. Chun
    Director, Army Board for Correction 
	of Military Records

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2000046424	
SUFFIX		
RECON		
DATE BOARDED	20001109	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE	GD/SDRP	
DATE OF DISCHARGE	19670803	
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY	AR635-212	
DISCHARGE REASON	A51.00	
BOARD DECISION	DENY	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.	A92.21	
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.