MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:   

	BOARD DATE:            16 May 2000
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR1999032351

	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. Antoinette Farley		Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Mr. Arthur A. Omartian		Chairperson	
	Mr. Van B. Cunningham		Member	
	Mr. Lester Echols		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 request for correction of his military records to show that he was awarded the Bronze Star Medal with “V” Device.

APPLICANT STATES:  In effect, he restates that he should be awarded the Bronze Star Medal with “V” Device.

NEW EVIDENCE OR INFORMATION:  Incorporated herein by reference are military records which were summarized in a memorandum prepared to reflect the Board's original consideration of his case on 7 October 1998 (COPY ATTACHED).  He further submits copies of inquires from his Representative in Congress on this matter; a copy of a hometown newspaper article which credits him with receiving the Bronze Star Medal with “V” Device (previously considered by the Board); a historical article on the 27th Engineer Battalion (previously considered by the Board); a memorandum from the Seneca County Veterans Service Commission to his Representative in Congress soliciting his help; copies of general orders awarding him the Army Commendation Medal and the Good Conduct Medal (1st award) (previously considered by the Board); a DA Form 638 (Recommendation for Award) submitted by the applicant’s Representative in Congress to the Secretary of the Army recommending approval of the award of the Bronze Star Medal with “V” Device; and several pieces of correspondence from the Military Awards Branch, Total US Army Personnel Command, informing/clarifying to the Representative in Congress why the award of the Bronze Star Medal with “V” Device was denied.

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.  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, in this case, has failed to submit additional or relevant evidence that would satisfy the aforementioned requirement.

2.  Essentially, the applicant has submitted much of the same evidence he previously submitted and which was previously considered by the Board.

3.  The letters from his county veteran services office and from his Representative in Congress essentially are administrative requests for action and a show of support to the applicant.  

4.  The Board is satisfied that all Department of the Army and applicant’s records were thoroughly researched and to date no evidence supports his request for the award of the Bronze Star Medal with “V” Device.

5.  In summary, 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

__AAO       __VBC__  ___LE    _  DENY APPLICATION

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

INDEX

CASE ID	AR1999032351	
SUFFIX		
RECON		
DATE BOARDED	20000516	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE	HD	
DATE OF DISCHARGE	1971 05 14	
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY	AR 635-200	
DISCHARGE REASON	A07.00	
BOARD DECISION	DENY	
REVIEW AUTHORITY	DIRECTOR	
ISSUES         1.	A107.60	
2.	A100.21	
3.	A107.46	
4.		
5.		
6.