MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:       

	BOARD DATE:            14 March 2002
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR2001063669

	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	
	Mr. Jessie B. Strickland		Analyst	

The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Ms. JoAnn H. Langston		Chairperson	
	Mr. Roger W. Able		Member	
	Mr. Walter T. Morrison		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 honorable discharge be corrected to show that he was discharged by reason of medical disability.

APPLICANT STATES:  In effect, that he was unjustly discharged because he had high blood pressure and bad kidneys and no one would do anything to help him.  These were the cause of his mental/physical problems at the time that led to his discharge and every time he sought help, he was sent back to the barracks.

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

He enlisted in St. Louis, Missouri in the United States Army Reserve (USAR) on 31 August 1979, for a period of 6 years, assignment to a troop program unit in St. Louis, and training as a material supply specialist.  He was 19 years of age at the time of his enlistment and he successfully completed his basic combat training (BCT) at Fort Jackson, South Carolina.  He was transferred to Fort Lee, Virginia for his advanced individual training (AIT).

On 11 December 1979, he was relieved from the material supply specialist course for academic failure.  His grade average for the course was 17.80% out of a possible 100% and the course director opined that the applicant did not have the ability or the motivation to do such academic type work.  He indicated that the applicant had poor reading and writing skills and recommended that the applicant be enrolled in an infantry-type course, since he had no problems in BCT and if his USAR unit concurred.  The applicant indicated that he desired to be either a journalist or a photographer.

On 12 December 1979, he was enrolled in a food service specialist course of instruction (AIT); however, he was dropped from that course on 15 February 1980, due to lack of motivation, excessive absenteeism, and lack of demonstrated ability or desire to complete the course. 

On 22 February 1980, the applicant’s commander notified him that he was initiating action to separate him from the service under the provisions of the Trainee Discharge Program (TDP), based on his marginal and/or non-productive performance.  The applicant elected not to submit a statement in his own behalf and elected to have a separation medical examination conducted.  A copy of that examination is not present in the available records.

The battalion commander interviewed the applicant and indicated that the applicant stated that he could not read and understand the course material and simply wanted out of the Army.  The battalion commander opined that further training would be a waste of resources and recommended that he be discharged.

The appropriate authority approved the recommendation for discharge on 27 February 1980, and directed that he be furnished an Honorable Discharge Certificate.

Accordingly, he was honorably discharged on 3 March 1980, under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 5-33 for marginal or          non- productive performance.  He had served 5 months and 13 days of total active service.

There is no indication in the available records to show that he ever applied to the Army Discharge Review Board to have the reason for his separation changed within that board’s 15-year statute of limitations.

Army Regulation 635-200, in effect at the time, set forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel.  Chapter 5 of that regulation provided, in pertinent part, for the separation of personnel for unsatisfactory performance or conduct (or both) while in an entry level status (less than 180 days of active service).  This policy applied to individuals who have demonstrated that they are not qualified for retention because they cannot meet the minimum standards prescribed for successful completion of training and they lack the aptitude, ability, motivation or self-discipline for military service, or that they have demonstrated characteristics not compatible with satisfactory continued service.  Personnel separated under that provision would have their service characterized as honorable or under honorable conditions.  Under current standards, personnel separated in an entry level status will be separated with their service uncharacterized.

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 administrative separation was accomplished in compliance with applicable regulations with no indication of procedural errors, which would tend to jeopardize his rights.

2.  The type of discharge directed and the reasons therefore were appropriate given the circumstances in the case.

3.  In the absence of evidence to the contrary, it must be presumed that the applicant was deemed fit for separation or he would not have been discharged until such time as his medical condition was resolved.  The applicant has failed to show through the evidence submitted with his case or the evidence of record that such was not the case.

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 this 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

___jhl___  __rwa ___  ___wtm__  DENY APPLICATION

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

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2001063669	
SUFFIX		
RECON	YYYYMMDD	
DATE BOARDED	2002/03/14	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE	HD	
DATE OF DISCHARGE	1980/03/03	
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY	AR635-200	
DISCHARGE REASON	Tdp	
BOARD DECISION	DENY	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.  191	110.0200/rsn	
2.  538	144.3100/a31.00	
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.