MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:      

	BOARD DATE:            4 April 2002                  
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR2002066926

	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. Lee Cates		Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Mr. Arthur A. Omartian 		Chairperson	
	Mr. Roger W. Able		Member	
	Ms. Karen Y. Fletcher		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: That his records be corrected to show he was honorably discharged as a staff sergeant.

APPLICANT STATES: That he never knew he had been demoted.  After an injury in the San Diego California National Guard unit and during surgery at Balboa Naval Hospital, he had already served 20 years in the US Army Reserve. He provides a partial response from the Department of Veterans Affairs to an application for service-connected disability compensation benefits and an Honorable Discharge Certificate, dated 12 December 1995.  

EVIDENCE OF RECORD: The applicant's available military records show:

During the period 9 March 1963 to 9 March 1970 and 18 December 1973 to      17 December 1985, the applicant was a member of the California Army National Guard (CAARNG).

On 30 March 1989, he reenlisted in the CAARNG for 6 years in pay grade E-6.

On 29 May 1990, Orders 29-1, CAARNG reduced the applicant to sergeant, pay grade E-5 for inefficiency (absent without leave (AWOL)), under chapter 6, National Guard Regulation (NGR) 600-200.

On 12 July 1990, Orders 33-1, CAARNG reduced him to specialist, pay grade   E-4 for inefficiency (AWOL), under chapter 6, NGR 600-200.

On 9 August 1990, Orders 8-1, CAARNG reduced him to private first class, pay grade E-3 for inefficiency (AWOL), under chapter 6, NGR 600-200. 

During the period between 9 August and 7 November 1990, he was reduced to private, pay grade E-2.

As of 9 October 1990, his address was unknown and he did not respond to action notifications mailed to his last known address.

On 7 November 1990, he was discharged, with a characterization of general, under honorable conditions, from the CAARNG and reassigned to the USAR Control Group (Annual Training).  His NGB Form 22 (Report of Separation and Record of Service) shows he had 4 years, 4 months and 22 days of obligated service remaining.  Further, it shows that he had 1 year, 7 months and 8 days service this period, 18 years, 6 months and 1 day of Reserve component service, 6 months prior active federal service and total service for pay of 20 years,           7 months and 9 days 

On 12 December 1995, he was honorably discharged from the USAR control Group in pay grade E-2.
This Board operates under the standard of presumption of regularity in governmental affairs.  The standard states, in effect, that in the absence of evidence to the contrary, the Board must presume that all actions taken by the military were proper.  There is nothing in the records or in the evidence submitted by the applicant that overcomes this presumption.

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 record clearly shows that the applicant absented himself from his unit and was reduced in grade accordingly.  There is no error or injustice.

2.  The applicant has not shown to the satisfaction of the Board that he was injured at his CAARNG unit, that he had service-connected surgery at a naval hospital, that he was paid $5,000 for his disability by the CAARNG, or that he was properly excused from unit participation.

3.  The evidence shows he was properly reduced and discharged from the ARNG and USAR.  He has not shown otherwise.

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 this requirement

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

_rwa_____  __kyf___  _aao____ DENY APPLICATION

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

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2002066926	
SUFFIX		
RECON		
DATE BOARDED	20020404	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE		
DATE OF DISCHARGE		
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY		
DISCHARGE REASON		
BOARD DECISION	DENY	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.	128	
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.