MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:   

	BOARD DATE:  16 March 2000
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR1999028432

	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. Vic Whitney		Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Ms. Jennifer L. Prater		Chairperson	
	Mr. Christopher J. Prosser		Member	
	Mr. Orville W. Troesch		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 his general discharge from the ARNG be upgraded to fully honorable.

APPLICANT STATES:  The applicant makes no statement or identification of error or injustice.

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

He enlisted in the ARNG effective 17 June 1976.  He had prior active and Reserve Component service.  He completed training as a combat engineer on 20 November 1976 and returned to his unit.

Effective 16 November 1979 he was reduced from grade E-3 to E-2 for AWOL.  On 17 January 1980 the command recommended the applicant be ordered to active duty for failure to participate satisfactorily in unit training.  The State Personnel Officer approved the request and separation from the ARNG in conjunction with his order to active duty was directed.

Orders for the applicant to report to active duty are not in the available record.  Effective 1 April 1980 he was discharged from the ARNG and transferred to the Annual Training Control Group for the remainder of his statutory obligation.  His NGB Form 22 (report of separation) shows that he was separated under honorable conditions under authority of National Guard Regulation (NGR) 635-200 for “Other Good and Sufficient Reasons”.  His remaining service obligation was shown as 16 June 1982.  Effective 16 June 1982 he was discharged from the USAR by reason of completion of required service and received a final honorable characterization of service.

NGR 635-200, in effect at the time, provided the authority to separate unsatisfactory participants in the ARNG.  The regulation provided for an honorable or general discharge based on the overall character of service.

AR 135-91, in effect at the time, provided for the order to active duty or transfer to the Annual Training Control Group of obligated soldiers who failed to participate satisfactorily in unit training.

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.  In the absence of evidence to the contrary, it is presumed that the discharge proceedings were conducted in accordance with law and regulations applicable at the time.  The type of discharge directed and the reasons therefor were appropriate considering all the facts of the case.

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

__JP___  ___CP__  __OT___  DENY APPLICATION

						Karl F. Schneider
				     Director, Army Review Boards Agency

INDEX

CASE ID	AR1999028432	
SUFFIX		
RECON		
DATE BOARDED	20000316	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE	GD	
DATE OF DISCHARGE	19800401	
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY	NGR 600-200	
DISCHARGE REASON	UNSAT PARTICIPANT	
BOARD DECISION	DENY	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.	110.02	
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.