PROCEEDINGS

	IN THE CASE OF:  

	BOARD DATE:           6 October 1999                   
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR1998012175

	I certify that hereinafter is recorded the true and complete record of the proceedings of the Army Board for Correction of Military Records in the case of the above-named individual.  

	Mr. Loren G. Harrell		Director	
	Mrs. Nancy Amos		Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Mr. Arthur A. Omartian		Chairperson	
	Mr. Van B. Cunningham		Member	
	Mr. Roger W. Able		Member	

	The applicant and counsel if any, did not appear before the Board.

	The Board considered the following evidence:

	Exhibit A - Application for correction of military 
                records
	Exhibit B - Military Personnel Records (including
	            advisory opinion, if any)

FINDINGS:

1.  The applicant has exhausted or the Board has waived the requirement for exhaustion of all administrative remedies afforded by existing law or regulations.

2.  The applicant requests that his DD Form 214, block 11 be corrected to show his military occupational specialty (MOS) and the years held; block 12a to read 22 August 1994 with the appropriate recomputation of his service; and block 13 to show he was awarded the Recruiting Ring.

3.  The applicant makes no further statement.  His active duty orders, previous DD Form 214 and approved award of the Recruiter Ring are provided as supporting evidence.  

4.  The applicant’s military records show that he was transferred to the U. S. Army Reserve on 20 September 1993 under the Special Separations Benefit program after serving over 11 years on active duty in the Regular Army.  He was ordered to active duty in an active guard/reserve (AGR) status and ordered to attend the Army Recruiter Course beginning 6 July 1994 with a reporting date of 22 August 1994 to the U. S. Army Recruiting Battalion, Syracuse, NY.  His MOS orders are not available but he presumably was awarded primary MOS 79R20 upon his graduation from the Army Recruiter Course.

5.  The applicant began performing duties in MOS 79R.  He reenlisted in the      U. S. Army Reserve with an AGR reenlistment control number on 15 June 1996.  He was promoted to Staff Sergeant on 1 October 1996 and awarded primary MOS 79R30.  

6.  The applicant’s elimination packet for misconduct is not available; however, on 22 October 1997 he accepted non-judicial punishment under Article 15, Uniform Code of Military Justice for wrongfully using cocaine.  He had appealed the Article 15 but his appeal was denied.  His primary MOS of 79R should have been withdrawn at least by the time his separation was approved but such orders are not available.

7.  On 6 February 1998, the applicant was discharged for misconduct.  His DD Form 214 shows he completed 1 year, 7 months and 22 days of active service for that period with zero prior active or inactive service.  Block 11 shows his primary MOS as 00R30, held 0 years and 0 months.  Block 13 does not list the Recruiter Ring.

8.  Army Regulation (AR) 635-5 prescribes the separation documents prepared for soldiers upon discharge from active military service.  It establishes standardized policy for the preparation of DD Form 214.  It states that block 11 will show the MOS codes, titles, years and months for enlisted personnel.  (A proposed revision to AR 635-5 states that, from information taken from the DA Form 2A, all MOS served for at least one year and the number of years and months served will be entered.)  Block 12a will show the date of the first day of the last immediate reenlistment for which a DD Form 214 was not issued.  (Block 18 will show a list of enlistment periods for which a DD Form 214 was not issued).  (The proposed revision to AR 635-5 states that block 12a will show the beginning date of the continuous period of active duty for issuance of that DD Form 214.)  Blocks 12c, d and e will show all service less time lost.  

9.  Army Regulation 600-8-22 prescribes Army policy and criteria concerning individual military awards.  It defines decorations as distinctively designed marks of honor; specifically, the personal decorations from the Medal of Honor descending in order of merit to the Army Achievement Medal.  “Medal” is defined as the distinctive physical device of metal and ribbon which constitutes the tangible evidence of a decoration, Good Conduct Medal, or service medal.

CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The evidence of record shows the applicant was ordered to active duty on      6 July 1994.  He reenlisted on 15 June 1996.  By strict interpretation of the regulation currently in effect, 15 June 1996 is the correct date shown in block 12a of his DD Form 214.  However, block 18 of the DD Form 214 omits his continuous active duty period beginning on 6 July 1994, presumably because it was not technically an “enlistment” period.  Under the proposed revised regulation, block 12a would have shown 6 July 1994 as the beginning date of his continuous period of active duty for issuance of that DD Form 214, with block 12c showing his net (continuous) active service for that period as 3 years and 7 months.

2.  Block 12d erroneously omits the applicant’s prior service of 11 years and 13 days.  Block 12e erroneously omits his prior inactive service of 2 months and 7 days for his initial delayed entry program service (authorized for pay at the time) and his 9 months and 16 days in the Control Group (Reinforcement) after his separation from the Regular Army for total inactive service of 11 months and 23 days.  

3.  Block 11 of the applicant’s DD Form 214 erroneously shows MOS 00R.  00R was converted to 79R some time prior to his discharge.  The regulation currently in effect is not clear on what MOSs should be shown in this block.  It does not specifically prohibit the listing of an MOS once held but no longer held at the time of separation.  Under the proposed revised regulation, all MOSs served in for at least one year would be entered.

4.  The Board concludes that there is no error in block 13 in not reflecting the Recruiter Ring.  Such an award does not meet the regulatory definition of decoration or medal and is not a badge, citation or campaign ribbon.

5.  In view of the foregoing and as an exception to the regulation currently in effect, it would be in the interest of justice to correct the applicant’s records as recommended below.

RECOMMENDATION:

1.  That all of the Department of the Army records related to this case be corrected by:

     a.  changing the applicant’s DD Form 214, separation date 6 February 1998, block 11 to read “79R30, RECRUITER RTN NCO – 3 YRS 6 MOS//NOTHING FOLLOWS;” and

     b.  changing his DD Form 214 for separation date 6 February 1998, block 12a to read 1994 07 06; block 12c to read 0003 07 01; block 12d to read 0011 00 13; and block 12e to read 0000 11 23.

2.  That so much of the application as is in excess of the foregoing be denied.

BOARD VOTE:  

__aao___  __vbc___  __rwa___  GRANT AS STATED IN RECOMMENDATION

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

________  ________  ________  DENY APPLICATION

			Arthur A. Omartian
		______________________
		        CHAIRPERSON

INDEX

CASE ID	AR1998012175	
SUFFIX		
RECON		
DATE BOARDED	19991006	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE		
DATE OF DISCHARGE		
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY		
DISCHARGE REASON		
BOARD DECISION	(GRANT)	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.	110.04	
2.	100.00	
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.