MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:   

	BOARD DATE:            10 February 2000                  
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR1999025150

	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. Robert J. McGowan		Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Mr. Van B. Cunningham		Chairperson	
	Mr. James P. Steuve		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 Item 11 of his DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty, be corrected to show that he served 21 years, 10 months vice 21 years, 6 months.

APPLICANT STATES:  That he came on active duty on 11 October 1970 and retired on 31 August 1992 and that this equates to 21 years and 10 months, not 21 years and 6 months as reflected in Item 11, DD Form 214.

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

He was commissioned a second lieutenant via the Reserve Officers’ Training Corps on 17 May 1970 and reported for active duty on 11 October 1970.  He underwent training as a Signal Corps officer and reported to his first duty assignment at Fort Hood, Texas in March 1971.  He retired from active duty as a lieutenant colonel on 31 August 1992.

The applicant’s DD Form 214 shows that he served 21 years, 10 months, and 20 days of creditable active Federal service (Item 12c).  Item 11 (Primary Specialty) shows that, upon completion of all initial branch training, he was awarded primary specialty 25C, Signal Corps Officer, which he held for 21 years, 6 months.

Army Regulation 635-5 prescribes the separation documents which are prepared for individuals upon retirement, discharge, or release from active military service or control of the Army.  It establishes standardized policy for preparing and distributing DD Form 214 will be used to identify the specialty skill identifier (SSI - two digits and one letter), specialty title, and years and months held.  Item 12 (Record of Service) will be used to identify net active service for the period covered by the DD Form 214.

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.  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.  The applicant’s DD Form 214 is correct.  Item 12c reflects his total active Federal service from entry on active duty on 11 October 1970 to retirement on 31 August 1992.  Item 11 is only used for the purpose of showing the years and months served in a primary specialty; this is less than the period of total active service because the primary specialty is not awarded until completion of all branch schooling.  The applicant attended Signal Officer Basic and Communication-Electronic Staff Officer training following his initial entry.  This accounts for the difference in time between Item 11 and Item 12c.

3.  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

__VBC__  __JPS___  __KLW__  DENY APPLICATION

						Karl F. Schneider
				     Director, Army Review Boards Agency

INDEX

CASE ID	AR1999025150	
SUFFIX		
RECON		
DATE BOARDED	20000210	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE		
DATE OF DISCHARGE		
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY		
DISCHARGE REASON		
BOARD DECISION	DENY	
REVIEW AUTHORITY	DIRECTOR	
ISSUES         1.	100.0000	
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.