MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:   

	BOARD DATE:           11 June 2002
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR2002067229

	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. Carolyn G. Wade		Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Mr. Fred N. Eichorn		Chairperson	
	Mr. Roger W. Able		Member	
	Mr. Harry B. Oberg		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 discharge be changed from "unsatisfactory performance" to "tour of duty over."

APPLICANT STATES:  In effect, that he was a 19-year old kid when he was discharged and that he is now a 41-year old, responsible man.  He wants to be a model for his son, and unsatisfactory performance is not representative of the man he is today.

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

He enlisted in the Regular Army on 26 August 1980 for a period of 3 years.  He enlisted for the United States Army Training of Choice Enlistment Option, military occupational specialty (MOS) 94B, Cook.  Following completion of all military service, the applicant was awarded MOS 94B and was assigned to Germany as his first permanent duty assignment.

Following completion of his tour of duty in Germany, the applicant was assigned to Fort Dix, New Jersey.  While serving at Fort Dix, the applicant displayed an inability to get along with co-workers.  He was counseled by members of his chain of command, to include his company commander.  Counseling statements refer to his acceptance of two nonjudicial punishments (NJP) under Article 15, Uniform Code of Military Justice, for failure to obey a lawful order and failure to repair.  The NJP's are not a matter of record.

On or about 24 May 1983, the applicant was notified that he was being considered for separation with an honorable discharge under the provisions of chapter 13, Army Regulation 635-200, for unsatisfactory performance.  The applicant acknowledged notification and declined to submit a statement in his own behalf.  The appropriate authority approved the applicant's separation on 31 May 1983.  Accordingly, the applicant was released from active duty with an honorable discharge on 3 June 1983, after completing 2 years, 9 months, and 8 days of creditable military service.  He was transferred to the United States Army Reserve (USAR) Control Group Reinforcement.  

On 25 August 1986, the USAR Personnel Center, Orders Number D-08-06311 discharged the applicant from the USAR, Ready Reserve.

The applicant submitted a request to the Army Discharge Review Board (ADRB) to change his reenlistment eligibility (RE) code.  The ADRB notified the applicant that changing his RE code was not within their purview.  On 6 November 1984, the ADRB closed the applicant's case and told him to submit an Application for Correction of Military Record (DD Form 149) to this Board to change his RE code.

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.  For historical purposes, the Army has an interest in maintaining the accuracy of its records.  The data and information contained in those records should actually reflect the conditions and circumstances that existed at the time the records were created.  In the absence of a showing of material error or injustice, this Board is reluctant to recommend that those records be changed.

3.  From a records review, the applicant apparently had no problems in basic combat training or in advanced individual training.  Likewise, his first duty assignment as a cook in Germany appears to have been successfully concluded. However, he had problems adjusting to his new environment when he arrived at Fort Dix in July 1982.  This led to counselings and NJP's in an attempt to correct his attitude and duty performance.  Ultimately, he was processed for an administrative separation when his duty performance did not improve.

4.  The discharge proceedings were conducted in accordance with law and regulations applicable at the time. The honorable character of the discharge is commensurate with the applicant's overall record of military service.  The narrative reason for separation accurately reflects his last year of active service.

5.  The Board acknowledges the applicant's successful transition to civilian life and noted the many accomplishments outlined in his application and in the documents with his application.  However, in review of the applicant’s entire service record, the Board found that these accomplishments did not overcome the reason for discharge.

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

__fne___  __rwa___  __rtd___  DENY APPLICATION

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

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2002067229	
SUFFIX		
RECON		
DATE BOARDED	20020611	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE	HD	
DATE OF DISCHARGE	19830603	
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY	AR 635-200, c13	
DISCHARGE REASON		
BOARD DECISION	DENY	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.	144.9405	
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.