MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

IN THE CASE OF:  

BOARD DATE:           21 December 2000                  
DOCKET NUMBER:   AR2000049031

	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. G. E. Vandenberg		Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Ms. Karol A. Kennedy		Chairperson	
	Mr. Ernest W. Lutz		Member	
	Ms. Gail J. Wire		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 showing he was entitled to the Combat Infantryman Badge (CIB).

APPLICANT STATES:  In effect, that during his service in the National Guard, he held the military occupational specialty (MOS) of heavy weapons infantryman, therefore he is entitled to the CIB.

NEW EVIDENCE OR INFORMATION:  Incorporated herein by reference are military records which were summarized in a memorandum of consideration (MOC) prepared to reflect the Board's previous consideration of the case (AR2000035495) on 3 August 2000

The applicant submits a letter outlining his service, a copy of a Report of Transfer or Discharge from Active Duty (DD Form 214), dated 24 April 1959, and a letter and excerpt of a unit history from the National Archives.

The applicant’s submission constitutes new evidence that requires Board consideration.

The applicant’s DD Form 214 from 1959 does show that he was a heavy weapons infantryman for the period of his National Guard tour.  It also shows that the applicant had no overseas time during this period of service.

Army Regulation 15-185 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.  As noted in the prior decisional document, to qualify for the CIB a soldier must have an infantry or special forces specialty and must have satisfactorily performed duty while assigned or attached as a member of an infantry, ranger or special forces unit of brigade, regimental, or smaller size during a period such unit was engaged in active ground combat. 

2.  While the applicant did have an infantry MOS as a Guardsman, he did not serve in combat at that time.  When the applicant was in combat, he was with the 9th Field Artillery.  Therefore, the applicant does not qualify for award of the CIB.

3.  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.

4.  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

__KAK__  ___EWL _  __GJW__  DENY APPLICATION

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

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2000049031	
SUFFIX		
RECON	 	
DATE BOARDED	20001221 	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE		
DATE OF DISCHARGE		
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY		
DISCHARGE REASON		
BOARD DECISION	DENY	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.	107.0111	
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.