MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:

	BOARD DATE:  3 December 1998                        
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AC98-11038
	                                    AR1999015281

	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. Rosa M. Chandler		Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Mr. John N. Sloan 		Chairperson	
	Mr. Edward Williamson		Member	
	Mr. Roger W. Able		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:  In effect, that her honorable discharge (HD) under the provisions of chapter 13, Army Regulation 635-200 for unsatisfactory performance be changed to a fully satisfactory discharge.

APPLICANT STATES:  She made no contentions.

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

The applicant was born on 10 February 1977 and on 14 November 1995, she enlisted in the Regular Army for 3 years and training in military occupational specialty  71L (Administrative Specialist).  The highest grade she achieved was pay grade E-2.

On 22 May 1996, the applicant failed to meet the minimum requirements to pass her annual Army Physical Fitness Test (APFT).  She was required to run 2 miles in 18:54.  She ran the two miles in 22:29.  On 22 May 1996, she was counseled concerning the failure of the APFT.  She was also advised that she would be scheduled for retest in 90 days and she would be provided training assistance.

On 29 August 1996, the applicant failed the APFT a second time.  She was counseled concerning meeting APFT standards, and the possibility of her being discharged under the provisions of chapter 13, Army Regulation 635-200, for unsatisfactory performance.  She was also flagged in accordance with Army Regulation 600-8-2.

On 16 October 1996, the commander officially notified the applicant that she was being recommended for discharge under the provisions of Army Regulation 
635-200, chapter 13, for unsatisfactory performance.  She was advised of her rights.

On 18 October 1996, the applicant acknowledged notification of the commander’s intent to separate her.  She consulted with legal counsel concerning the basis for the contemplated separation action and the rights available to her.  She was not entitled to have her case considered by a board of officers.  The applicant’s record does contain a memorandum submitted by the applicant’s counsel in her behalf.

The separation authority approved the separation recommendation and directed the issuance of a HD.  The separation authorities approval is undated and unsigned.  On 1 November 1996, the applicant was discharged under the provisions of AR 635-200, chapter 13, for unsatisfactory performance with a HD. She had completed 8 months and 1 day of creditable active service during the enlistment under review, and she had completed 3 months and 17 days of prior active military service.

On 19 August 1998, the Army Discharge Review Board denied the applicant’s request for a change in reason.

Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel.  Chapter 13 contains the policy and outlines the procedures for separating individuals for unsatisfactory performance, and provides, in pertinent part, that commanders will separate a member under this chapter when, in the commander's judgment, the member will not develop sufficiently to participate satisfactorily in further training and/or become a satisfactory soldier.  Repeated failure of the APFT is a basis for a discharge for unsatisfactory performance.

DISCUSSION:  Considering all the evidence, allegations, and information presented by the applicant, together with the evidence of record, applicable law and regulations, and advisory opinion(s), 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 has failed to submit evidence that would satisfy the aforementioned requirement.

2.	Evidence of record indicates the applicant consulted with legal counsel and
signed a statement which indicated that she was advised and understood the effects of receiving a discharge issued under the provisions of  chapter 13, Army Regulation 635-200.  Further, the record does not contain any evidence and she has presented none that demonstrates that she was coerced or forced to sign the statement under duress nor that the command acted in an arbitrary or capricious manner.

3.  Evidence of record indicates the applicant was provided assistance to help her pass the APFT.  At this late date it is impossible to determine whether the assistance was sufficient.

4.	  The discharge proceedings were conducted in accordance with laws and
regulations in effect at the time.  Not withstanding the unsigned separation directive, the Board concluded that the narrative reason for separation was commensurate with the applicant’s overall record of military service.

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

_JNS____  ___EW___ ___RWA_  DENY APPLICATION

						Loren G. Harrell
						Director

INDEX

CASE ID	AC97-10135	
SUFFIX		
RECON	YYYYMMDD	
DATE BOARDED	19981203	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE	HD	
DATE OF DISCHARGE	19961101	
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY	AR 635-200   	
DISCHARGE REASON	For Unsatisfactory Performance 	
BOARD DECISION	NC	
REVIEW AUTHORITY