MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:   

	BOARD DATE:              16 December 1998                
	DOCKET NUMBER:      AC98-11217

	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	
	Mr. William Blakley		Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Mr. Ernest M. Willcher		Chairperson	
	Ms. Lana E. McGlynn		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 discharge date be changed from 
1 September 1996 to 20 October 1995.

APPLICANT STATES:  That 19 October 1995 was his last drill date.  He states that his last drill date should be his date of separation. 

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

The applicant enlisted in to the USAR on 22 September 1995 for a period of
8 years.  He was ordered to active duty on 28 June 1996 to complete basic combat training and advanced individual training.

The applicant was advised of his selection for a Naval Reserve Officer Training Corp (ROTC) scholarship and admission to Cornell University on 8 April 1996.  Subsequently, his active duty for training orders were revoked on 21 June 1996 because of the applicant’s selection for a Naval ROTC scholarship and admission to Cornell University.  

The applicant’s commander submitted a request for separation under the provisions of Chapter 3, Army Regulation 135 (Enlistment or Appointment In Any Component of the Armed Forces).  The commander cited the basis for the separation action was the applicant’s acceptance of a Naval ROTC scholarship.

The separation action was approved by the appropriate authority and Orders 
18-27, Department of the Army, Headquarters, 77th Regional Support Command, Fort Totten, Flushing, New York, dated 18 January 1997 show that he was discharged on 1 September 1996.  He service was uncharacterized. 

The evidence of record reveals no indication that the applicant’s last drill date was 20 October 1995.

Army Regulation 135-178 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of Army National Guard (ARNG) and USAR enlisted personnel.  Paragraph 3-3 of that regulation provides, in pertinent part that ARNG and USAR soldiers who execute a USAR enlistment in the Senior ROTC with assignment to Control Group (ROTC) in accordance with Army Regulation 145-1, paragraph 3-15, will be discharged from their current ARNG or USAR enlistment agreements. 

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’s administrative separation was accomplished in compliance with applicable regulations with no indication of procedural errors which would tend to jeopardize his rights.
2.  Although the applicant’s last drill date may have been 19 October 1995 it does not established the effective date of his discharge from his USAR enlistment.

3.  The Board notes that the applicant’s was still in a reserve status until his enrollment became effective in the Naval ROTC program at Cornell University. 

4.  The evidence of record reveals that the applicant’s date of separation was 
1 September 1996, which coincides with his enrollment in the Naval ROTC program at Cornell University, as is indicated in the published order.

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

__EMW___  __LEM___  __CJS___  DENY APPLICATION

						Loren G. Harrell
						Director

INDEX

CASE ID	AC	
SUFFIX		
RECON	YYYYMMDD	
DATE BOARDED	YYYYMMDD	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE	(HD, GD, UOTHC, UD, BCD, DD)	
DATE OF DISCHARGE	YYYYMMDD	
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY	AR .  .  .  .  .  	
DISCHARGE REASON		
BOARD DECISION	(NC, GRANT , DENY, GRANT PLUS)	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.		
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.