MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

IN THE CASE OF:  

BOARD DATE:            21 September 2000
DOCKET NUMBER:   AR1999034550

	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. P. A. Castle		Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Mr. 		Chairperson	
	Mr. 		Member	
	Mr. 		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 upgrading his discharge. 

APPLICANT STATES:  In effect, that he received an honorable discharge after his first enlistment.  During his second tour he began drinking because of flashbacks of the gruesome things he had seen in Korea during the war.  His company commander and doctors did not understand.  He recently received help for post traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) and he needs his discharge upgraded. 

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 original consideration of his case on                               2 December 1998.  (COPY ATTACHED)

The applicant’s personal statement along with the submission of copies of his DD Form 214’s, summarized record of trial by special court martial, VA claim documents consisting of 18 pages of medical progress notes, and three letters from doctors constitute new evidence and argument.

The 18 pages of VA medical notes dating from January to May 2000 reveal the applicant recently joined a PTSD discussion group as an outpatient.  Many of the test results reveal the applicant has numerous serious health problems.

Two of the submitted letters are from a physician at the Intervential Cardiology and Vascular Consultants, in Orlando, Florida dated 18 May 1999 and                1 September 1999.  The doctor states in these letters that the applicant has been his patient since 1995 and has a history of peripheral vascular disease, coronary artery disease, and has undergone angioplasty.  His lifestyle is limited by hypertension, and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease.

A third letter from another of the applicant’s physician states he is 100% disabled.  He suffers from vascular disease, intermittent claudication of both legs, post traumatic stress syndrome, emphysema, and arthritis of both shoulders.  He is unable to take morphine or codeine for pain.

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.  No evidence has been submitted that would indicate there was an error or an injustice in the character of discharge the applicant received.

2.  The discharge proceedings were conducted in accordance with law and regulations applicable at the time.  The character of the discharge is commensurate with the applicant's overall record of military service.  The applicant’s health problems are unfortunate but they are irrelevant to the characterization of his discharge.  His unsubstantiated claim of recovery from alcoholism does not demonstrate that the discharge is inequitable.

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

__JHL___  ___CLG  _ ENA___    DENY APPLICATION

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

INDEX

CASE ID	AR1999034550	
SUFFIX		
RECON	 yes	
DATE BOARDED	20000921	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE	UD	
DATE OF DISCHARGE	250155	
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY		
DISCHARGE REASON	Misconduct	
BOARD DECISION	DENY	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.110.00		
2.A67.00		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.