MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION


	IN THE CASE OF:  
	

	BOARD DATE:           22 October 1998
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AC96-05396A

	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.




	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:  In effect, that his sentence to dismissal be mitigated to an administrative discharge.  

APPLICANT STATES:  That he specifically asked for a lawyer prior to submitting to the blood alcohol test.  He comments concerning his officer efficiency report which he maintains is improper.  He notes that this may be irrelevant but cites it to show that there is an error in the system.  He explains that he has not solicited any special letters of support because he believes that  his military record speaks for itself.  He notes that despite several surgeries he retained his jump status, and states that all he ever wanted to do in life was to be an Army officer.  He would gladly serve again to defend this country regardless of the outcome of this case.  He wishes that he could turn back time and change this tragic event but all that he can do is to regret it on a daily basis and to try to go forward with his life.  He believes that God  has forgiven him and he begs the Board for mercy.

EVIDENCE of RECORD: :  The applicant's military records show:

The applicant was appointed an infantry officer in 1980 and progressed normally. He was promoted to major on 1 January 1991.  His awards include the Bronze Star Medal, the Meritorious Service Medal, the Army Commendation Medal (third Award), the Army Achievement Medal (second award), the Armed Forces Expeditionary Medal, the Combat Infantryman Badge, the Expert Infantryman Badge and the Air Assault Badge and the Senior Parachutist Badge.

On 11 August 1994 a general court martial convicted him contrary to his pleas of involuntary manslaughter by culpable negligence, drunk driving and conduct unbecoming an officer and a gentleman by drunk driving.  The adjudged sentence which comprised confinement for 3 months and dismissal was approved as adjudged and was affirmed upon review.  The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Armed forces denied the petition for review. . 

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.  Trial by court-martial was warranted by the gravity of the offenses charged.  Conviction and discharge were effected in accordance with applicable law and regulations, and, given the Army’s programs to discourage alcohol abuse and drinking and driving and the applicant’s rank and experience the discharge appropriately characterizes the misconduct for which the applicant was convicted.

2.  The applicant's contentions relate to evidentiary and procedural matters, including those of mitigation and extenuation, which were finally and conclusively adjudicated in the court-martial appellate process, and furnish no basis for recharacterization of the discharge.

3.  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 the aforementioned requirement

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

__JH  ___  ___FMK_  ___SLP__  DENY APPLICATION




						Loren G. Harrell
						Director