MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:        

	BOARD DATE:            1 September 1999
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR1999015803

	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. Deyon D. Battle		Analyst	

The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Mr. Stanley Kelley		Chairperson	
	Mr. James E. Anderholm		Member	
	Mr. Kenneth L. Wright		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 date of discharge from active duty be corrected to show that he completed 2 years of total active service.

APPLICANT STATES:  That he went on terminal leave on 21 March 1988 and that this date was incorrectly placed on Certificate of Release or Discharge (DD Form 214) as the date of his discharge.

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

On 13 May 1986, he enlisted in the Army for 3 years in the pay grade of E-1.  He successfully completed his training as a unit supply specialist.  On 13 May 1987, he was promoted to the pay grade of E-4.

On 21 January 1988, orders were published notifying the applicant that he was being honorably released under the early transition program under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 16 as a result of a reduction in authorized strength.  He was informed that unless the orders were changed or rescinded, his effective date of release from active duty would be 21 March 1988.

Accordingly, on 21 March 1988, he was honorably released from active duty under the aforementioned provisions.  He had completed 1 year, 10 months and 9 days of total active service.

A review of the records fails to show that the applicant was on terminal leave on 21 March 1988, the date of his discharge.

Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel.  It states, in pertinent part, that commanders who have a judge advocate or legal advisor available are authorized to order separation from active duty under chapters 8, 11, and 16; and under paragraph 5-15, chapters 9 and 13 in those cases in which the notification procedures are used.  Personnel separated under the provisions of paragraph 16-8 will be notified of the separation by appropriate commanders and provided the basis for the separation.  

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 actions by the Army in this case were proper, and there is no doubt to be resolved in favor of the applicant.

2.  He was notified on 21 January 1988, that he was being honorably released from active duty under the early transition program as a result of a reduction in authorized strength.  There is no evidence of record nor has the applicant submitted any evidence to support his contention that his date of release from active duty is in error.

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

___sk___  __ja ____  __klw ___  DENY APPLICATION

						Loren G. Harrell
						Director

INDEX

CASE ID	AR1999015803	
SUFFIX		
RECON		
DATE BOARDED	1999/09/01	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE		
DATE OF DISCHARGE		
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY		
DISCHARGE REASON		
BOARD DECISION	DENY	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.  190	110.0100	
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.