MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:   

	BOARD DATE:           29 August 2000                   
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR2000045775

	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	
	Mrs. Nancy Amos		Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Mr. John D. Miller		Chairperson	
	Mr. Roger Able		Member	
	Mr. Charles Gainor		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 28 of his Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty, DD Form 214, be left blank.

APPLICANT STATES:  That the reason for his discharge, “unsatisfactory performance,” is hampering his ability to obtain a job with law enforcement and is contradicted by his physical and academic standing at the time of his discharge.

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

He enlisted in the Regular Army on 2 October 1991.  He completed basic training.

While in advanced individual training, the applicant was counseled on 12 May 1992 for his recent, persistent behavior of requesting discharge from the Army.  He constantly and repeatedly stated he strongly desired to be removed from military service.  He was causing a morale problem with his peers.

On 26 May 1992, the applicant’s commander initiated discharge action under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 13 for unsatisfactory performance.  He stated that the applicant would not develop sufficiently to participate satisfactorily in further training and become a satisfactory soldier.  His attitude was not conducive to good military order and he had repeatedly demonstrated a strong desire to get out of the Army.  Despite attempts to develop him as a satisfactory soldier, he had become a disruptive influence in the unit.

The applicant acknowledged notification of the separation action.  He requested representation by counsel and elected not to submit a statement in his own behalf.

On 2 June 1992, the appropriate authority approved the recommendation and directed that he be given an honorable discharge.

On 5 June 1992, he was honorably discharged, in pay grade E-2, under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 13 – unsatisfactory performance. He had completed 8 months and 4 days of creditable active service and had no lost time.

Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel.  Chapter 13 contains the policy and outlines the procedures for separating individuals for unsatisfactory performance and provides, in pertinent part, that commanders will separate a member under this chapter when, in the commander’s judgment, the member will not develop sufficiently to participate satisfactorily in further training and/or become a satisfactory soldier.  
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 this requirement.

2.  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.  The applicant was discharged for unsatisfactory performance because he repeatedly stated he wanted to be discharged and he was causing a morale problem among his peers.  The applicant’s noted attitude indicated that he would not develop sufficiently to become a satisfactory soldier and therefore the reason for his separation was correct.

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

__jdm___  __ra____  __cg____  DENY APPLICATION

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

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2000045775	
SUFFIX		
RECON		
DATE BOARDED	20000829	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE	HD	
DATE OF DISCHARGE	19920605	
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY	AR 635-200, ch 13	
DISCHARGE REASON	A04.00	
BOARD DECISION	(DENY)	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.	100.00	
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.