MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:   

	BOARD DATE:           11 February 1999  
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR1998012592

	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. Loren G. Harrell		Director	
	Ms. Wanda L. Waller		Analyst	

The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Ms. Irene N. Wheelwright		Chairperson	
	Mr. Van B. Cunningham		Member	
	Ms. Carol Jo Suiter		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 separation code (JBK) on his DD Form 214 be corrected to allow him to receive separation pay.  

APPLICANT STATES:  In effect, that many veterans who served until their expiration term of service (ETS) or went on inactive leave to ETS received separation pay.  He contends that he was never notified because of the incorrect separation code on his DD Form 214.    

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

He enlisted on 24 July 1984 for a period of 3 years and remained on active duty through continuous reenlistments.  He was promoted to the pay grade of E-4 on 1 November 1985 and served as a military policeman in Germany from 
12 December 1986 to 9 June 1988.

On 4 July 1989 the applicant received assignment instructions for a two year tour in Germany.  He signed a Declination of Continued Service Statement on
18 August 1989 wherein he acknowledged that he was counseled regarding the requirements to satisfy a length-of-service requirement incident to an operational commitment, and his refusal to extend his enlistment or reenlist to comply with the commitment.  Subsequently, he was transferred to Korea until his ETS.

Accordingly, he was honorably discharged on 15 August 1991 under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 4, for expiration term of service.  He had served 7 years and 22 days of total active service.

Department of the Army Circular 635-92-1 (Separation Pay) outlines eligibility criteria and provides samples of voluntary separation pay computations for the Active Army, U.S. Army Reserve and the Army National Guard.  Chapter 2 of that circular provides, in pertinent part, that a soldier separated at or before ETS who signs a Declination of Continued Service Statement is not eligible for separation pay. 

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 applicant was properly discharged in accordance with applicable regulations with no indication of any of the applicant’s rights.

2.  The separation code used in the applicant’s case is correct and was applied in accordance with the applicable regulations.  Therefore, he is not eligible for separation pay as outlined in the Department of the Army Circular
635-92-1.  

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

___inw__  ___vbc__  __cjs____  DENY APPLICATION

						Loren G. Harrell
						Director

INDEX

CASE ID	AC98-12562/AR1998012592	
SUFFIX		
RECON	 	
DATE BOARDED	1999/02/11	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE		
DATE OF DISCHARGE	 	
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY	 	
DISCHARGE REASON		
BOARD DECISION	DENY	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.  110.000		
2.  128.000		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.