MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:   

	BOARD DATE:          30 May 2002         
	DOCKET NUMBER:  AR2002068072   

	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	
	Ms. Wanda L. Waller 		Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Mr. Raymond V. O’Connor		Chairperson	
	Mr. John P. Infante		Member	
	Ms. Paula Mokulis		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 granting clemency in the form of a general discharge. 

APPLICANT STATES:  In effect, that his bad conduct discharge be upgraded to a general discharge. 

NEW EVIDENCE OR INFORMATION:  Incorporated herein by reference are military records which were summarized in the decisional document prepared to reflect the consideration of Docket Number AC98-09734 by the Army Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR) on 9 September 1998.

The applicant submits character reference letters from a Training Supervisor and Line Floater at his place of employment.  They attest that the applicant has a positive attitude, that he sets high standards in the work place and that he is a valuable asset to their company.  

He provided a character reference letter from a law enforcement officer who contends that he grew up with the applicant, attended school and church with him and that their families were close and continue to be on a daily basis.

The applicant provided a letter of explanation wherein he asks the Board to upgrade his bad conduct discharge.  He points out that since his discharge he has maintained full time employment and has been a law abiding citizen.  He
states that he did a lot of good things in the Army; however, he made one mistake which cost him his military career.

He also provided a DD Form 1577 (Authorization for Issuance of Awards), dated 18 June 2001, which shows that he is eligible for the Kuwait Liberation Medal (K), the Southwest Asia Service Medal with three bronze service stars, the Parachutist Badge and the Sharpshooter Badge with Auto Rifle Bar.

The applicant’s submissions are new evidence which have not been previously considered by the ABCMR; therefore, these new documents will be considered by the Board.

Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 3-7, provides that a general discharge is a separation from the Army under honorable conditions.  When authorized, it is issued to a soldier whose military record is satisfactory but not sufficiently meritorious to warrant an honorable discharge.  A characterization of under honorable conditions may be issued only when the reason for the soldier’s separation specifically allows such characterization.

Section 1552(f), Title 10, United States Code states that the ABCMR can only review records of court-martial and related administrative records to correct a record to accurately reflect action taken by reviewing authorities under the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) or to take clemency action.

Army Regulation 15-185 sets forth the policy and procedures for the ABCMR.  It provides that, if a request for 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 that was not in the record at the time of the Board’s prior consideration.  This includes but is not limited to any facts or arguments as to why relief should be granted.  The staff of the Board is authorized to determine whether or not such evidence has been submitted.

Army Regulation 15-185 provides further guidance for reconsideration requests that are received more than one 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 with 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 Board considered the character reference letters provided in support of the applicant’s request.  However, good post service conduct alone is not a basis for granting clemency in the form of a general discharge.

2.  The Board also noted the awards and decorations received as a result of the applicant’s honorable service in Southwest Asia.  

3.  However, the Board reviewed the applicant’s record of service which included one general court-martial conviction for carnal knowledge and providing a cereal malt beverage to a minor and determined that his military record was not satisfactory.  Therefore, the Board determined that clemency in the form of a general discharge was not warranted in this case.  

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

RVO____  JPI_____  PM______  DENY APPLICATION

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

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2002068072	
SUFFIX		
RECON	Yes	
DATE BOARDED	20020530	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE	BCD	
DATE OF DISCHARGE	19940103	
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY	 	
DISCHARGE REASON		
BOARD DECISION	DENY	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.	110.0200	
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.