MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:   

	BOARD DATE:           14 November 2000                  
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR2000045225

	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. Carl W. S. Chun		Director	
	Ms. Wanda L. Waller		Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Ms. Shirley Powell 		Chairperson	
	Ms. Meta Waller		Member	
	Mr. Terry L. Placek		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 narrative reason for separation be changed to “Satisfactory Performance” instead of “Unsatisfactory Performance” and that his record of service be changed to show that he served 798 days 
(2 years, 2 months and 8 days) instead of 528 days (1 year, 5 months and 
13 days).    

APPLICANT STATES:  In effect, that although he did not pass the final physical fitness training period, he did perform the required remedial duties in a satisfactory manner.  He contends that he actually served 798 days from the time of his enlistment, not 528 days.  He also contends that he was the victim of age discrimination and “administrative neglect”.     

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

The applicant enlisted in the USAR on 28 August 1995 under the delayed entry program.  He entered active duty on 3 October 1995 for a period of 3 years and served as a food service specialist.  The applicant was discharged with an under honorable conditions (general discharge) discharge on 25 March 1997 under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, Chapter 13, for unsatisfactory performance.  

The Army Discharge Review Board upgraded the applicant’s discharge to honorable on 19 July 2000.  The Army Discharge Review Board found the reason for discharge was proper and equitable and voted not to change it.

Item 28 (Narrative Reason for Separation) on the applicant’s DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) shows the entry “UNSATISFACTORY PERFORMANCE”.  

Item 12c (Net Active Service This Period) on the applicant’s DD Form 214 shows he served 1 year, 5 months and 23 days.

Item 25 (Separation Authority) on the applicant’s DD Form 214 shows the entry “AR [Army Regulation] 635-200 CHAP [Chapter] 13”.  Item 26 (Separation Code) on his DD Form 214 shows the entry “JHJ”.  Army Regulation 635-5-1 (Separation Program Designator Codes) states the reason for discharge based on separation code “JHJ” is “Unsatisfactory Performance” and the regulatory authority is Army Regulation 635-200, Chapter 13.  

The applicant’s DD Form 4/3 (Enlistment Document) shows that he entered active duty on 3 October 1995.  The applicant’s separation orders show that he was discharged on 25 March 1997.  The applicant served 1 year, 5 months and 23 days of total active service. 

There is no evidence in the applicant’s personnel service records which shows that the applicant was the victim of age discrimination or “administrative neglect”.

Army Regulation 635-5-1 (Separation Program Designator Codes) prescribes the specific authorities (regulatory, statutory, or other directives), the reasons for the separation of members from active military service, and the separation program designators to be used for these stated reasons.

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 contention that his reason for separation should be “Satisfactory Performance” instead of “Unsatisfactory Performance” was noted by the Board.  However, the reason for separation in the applicant’s case is correct and was applied in accordance with the applicable regulations in effect at the time of his discharge.  

2.  The Army Discharge Review Board found the applicant’s reason for discharge was proper and equitable and voted not to change it.

3.  The applicant has failed to show through the evidence submitted or the evidence of record that the narrative reason for separation issued to him was in error or unjust.    

4.  Although the applicant contends that he served 798 days (a total of 2 years,
2 months and 8 days), evidence of record shows the applicant served 1 year,
5 months and 23 days of total active service.  Therefore, item 12c (Net Active Service This Period) on the applicant’s DD Form 214 is correct as currently constituted. 

5.  The Board noted the applicant’s contentions that he was the victim of age discrimination and “administrative neglect”.  However, the applicant has provided no evidence to support these contentions.    

6.  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

SP_____  MW_____  TLP_____  DENY APPLICATION

		    Carl W. S. Chun
		    Director, Army Board for Correction
    of Military Records

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2000045225	
SUFFIX		
RECON		
DATE BOARDED	20001114	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE	(GD)  Army Discharge Review Board upgraded discharge to honorable on 20000719	
DATE OF DISCHARGE	19970325	
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY	AR 635-200 Chapter 13	
DISCHARGE REASON	Unsatisfactory Performance	
BOARD DECISION	(DENY)	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.	110.0200	
2.	100.0000	
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.