MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:       

	BOARD DATE:            12 April 2000
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR1999034186

	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. Jessie B. Strickland		Analyst	

The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Mr. Robert G. Hinkle		Chairperson	
	Ms. Barbara J. Ellis		Member	
	Mr. James P. Steuve		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 the separation code be changed on his report of separation (DD Form 214).

APPLICANT STATES:  In effect, that the separation code on his DD Form 214 is different than the code his separation orders indicate and it has resulted in his being denied his final separation pay.  In support of his application he submits a copy of his separation orders and DD Form 214.

EVIDENCE OF RECORD:  The applicant's military records, though somewhat incomplete, show:

He was ordered to active duty as a USAR medical corps captain on 26 June 1993 with an active duty service obligation of 5 years.  He was given a date of rank of 26 June 1993.

He served until 12 February 1999 when he was honorably released from active duty due to the completion of his required service.  He had served 5 years, 7 months, and 17 days of total active service and was given a separation code of “MBK” due to completion of required service.

However, his separation orders dated 23 November 1998 indicate that he was authorized separation pay and that he was to receive a separation code of “LGB”.

A review of the officer evaluation report ending on 30 September 1998 rendered on the applicant while serving as a general medical officer indicates that he was promotable to the rank of major at that time.

Army Regulation 635-5-1 provides the separation codes and narrative reasons for separation from the service.  It states, in pertinent part, that the separation code “MBK” will be used to designate officers who are voluntarily released from active duty due to completion of required service.  The separation code “LGB” will be used to designate officers who are involuntarily released from active duty due to nonselection for permanent promotion.

Department of the Army Circular 635-92-1 outlines the eligibility criteria for separation pay.  It states, in pertinent part, that separation pay is authorized for personnel who have served at least 6 years, but fewer than 20 years of active service and have been involuntarily separated from the service.

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.  It appears based on the evidence of record, that the applicant’s separation orders were incorrect at the time they were published, in that they indicate that he was entitled to separation pay.

2.  However, the applicant had less than 6 years of active service at the time of separation and therefore was not entitled to receive separation pay.

3.  Therefore, the separation code contained on the applicant’s DD Form 214 is correct and there appears to be no basis to change it at this time or to grant him separation pay that he was not entitled to receive.

4.  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

___rgh__  ___jps___  ___be___  DENY APPLICATION

						Karl F. Schneider
						Director, Army Review Boards Agency

INDEX

CASE ID	AR1999034186	
SUFFIX		
RECON		
DATE BOARDED	2000/04/12	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE		
DATE OF DISCHARGE		
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY		
DISCHARGE REASON		
BOARD DECISION	DENY	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.  110.0200	CHG SPD	
2.  128.0800	291/SEP PAY	
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.