MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:   

	BOARD DATE:            6 July 2000                  
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR1999030422

	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:

	Mr. Calvin M. Fowler 		Chairperson	
	Mr. Ernest M. Willcher 		Member	
	Mr. John P. Infante 		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 her separation code and narrative reason be changed.

The applicant provided an application, dated 16 August 1999, wherein she requested to remain in the USAR and continue drill status with her home reserve unit.  Subsequently, the applicant provided an addendum, dated 31 May 2000, wherein she stated that she understood that she was already able to remain in the USAR and continue drill status with her home reserve unit.  However, at this time, she requested that her separation code and narrative reason be changed on her DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty).  

APPLICANT STATES:  In effect, that she has been denied employment by the U.S. Post Office due to these codes.  She requests that items 26 (Separation Code) and 28 (Narrative Reason for Separation) on her DD Form 214 be changed to more accurately reflect her honorable service.  In support of her addendum, she submits copies of three DD Forms 214.     

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

The applicant enlisted in the Regular Army on 10 November 1987 for a period of 3 years.  On 16 April 1992 she was honorably discharged and ordered to active duty as a commissioned officer in the Armed Forces.  She was commissioned a Reserve officer in the USAR on 17 April 1992 and entered active duty.  On
30 September 1995 the applicant was released from active duty with an honorable discharge.  She entered active duty again on 28 September 1997.

On 12 January 1998 the applicant received a Relief for Cause Officer Evaluation Report for the period 15 October 1997 to 5 January 1998 because of her inability to adapt to her unit and for her poor attitude.

On 28 March 1998 nonjudicial punishment was imposed against the applicant for five specifications of disrespectful behavior towards three superiors and willfully disobeying lawful commands from two superiors.  Her punishment consisted of a written reprimand.  On 30 April 1998 the applicant received the written reprimand for this misconduct. 

Elimination action in this case was initiated on 18 August 1998 by the General Officer Show Cause Authority, Commanding General, United States Army Recruiting Command, because of conduct unbecoming an officer.

A Board of Inquiry was conducted on 18 February 1999 and determined that the applicant became abrasive and sarcastic towards a lieutenant colonel and was disrespectful towards the battalion executive officer and adjutant.  The Board recommended that the applicant not be retained in military service and that she be discharged from the military service with issuance of an Honorable Discharge Certificate.

On 15 July 1999 the Army Board of Review for Eliminations determined that the applicant should be eliminated from the service for significant misconduct, moral or professional dereliction.  The Board recommended that the applicant be eliminated from the Army and issued an Honorable Discharge.
 
Accordingly, the applicant was honorably discharged on 16 August 1999 under the provisions of Army Regulation 600-8-24, chapter 4, for unacceptable conduct. She had served 9 years, 9 months and 11 days of total active service.

Item 26 (Separation Code) on the applicant’s DD Form 214 with an effective date of 16 August 1999 shows “BNC”.  Army Regulation 635-5-1 (Separation Program Designator Codes) states the reason for discharge based on separation code “BNC” is “Unacceptable Conduct” and the regulatory authority is Army Regulation 635-120 (Officer Resignations and Discharges), Chapter 4, which is now designated as Army Regulation 600-8-24 (Officer Transfers and Discharges).

Item 28 (Narrative Reason for Separation) of the applicant’s DD Form 214 shows the entry “UNACCEPTABLE CONDUCT”.

Army Regulation 600-4-24 (Officer Transfers and Discharges) prescribes policies and procedures governing transfer and discharge of Army officer personnel.  Chapter 4, paragraph 4-2(b), provides for elimination due to misconduct, moral or professional dereliction, or in the interests of national security.  

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 Board noted the applicant’s contention that she has been denied employment by the U.S. Post Office due to her separation code and narrative reason for separation.  The Board also noted the applicant’s request that these codes be changed to more accurately reflect her honorable service. 

2.  The Board does not alter separation documents for the purpose of making applicant’s eligible for veteran benefits, educational or employment.

3.  The separation code and narrative reason for separation used in the applicant’s case are correct and were applied in accordance with the applicable regulations at the time of her separation from the Army.  Therefore, she is not entitled to correction of items 26 (Separation Code) or 28 (Narrative Reason for Separation) on her DD Form 214.

4.  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.

5.  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

CMF____  EMW____  JPI_____  DENY APPLICATION

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

INDEX

CASE ID	AR1999030422	
SUFFIX		
RECON		
DATE BOARDED	20000706	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE	(HD)	
DATE OF DISCHARGE	19990816	
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY	AR 600-8-24 Chapter 4	
DISCHARGE REASON	Unacceptable Conduct	
BOARD DECISION	(DENY)	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.	110.0200	
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.