PROCEEDINGS

	IN THE CASE OF: 

	BOARD DATE:            9 January 2001                  
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR2000039829

	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. Carl W. S. Chun		Director	
	Ms. Gale J. Thomas		Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Mr. Mark D. Manning		Chairperson	
	Mr. Curtis L. Greenway		Member	
	Mr. Eric N. Andersen		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 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) be corrected to show he separated in the pay grade of E-3, that his time in service be corrected to the right date and that documents concerning his previous separation be moved from his performance file to his restricted file.

3.  The applicant states that his DD Form 214 incorrectly shows his separation grade as E-2.  

4.  The applicant’s military records show that he enlisted in the Regular Army on 28 December 1998, for a period of 4 years. 

5.  On 8 February 1999, he accepted nonjudicial punishment under the provisions of Article 15, Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) for two violations of Article 86, for being absence without authority.  His punishment was reduction to E-2, suspended until 19 March 1999, extra duty and restriction for  14 days.  There is no indication that the reduction was vacated and all documents associated with his separation processing, except the DD Form 214, show his grade as E-3.

6.  On 6 May 1999, he was discharged under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 13, for unsatisfactory performance, with an under honorable conditions discharge.  Documents associated with his separation processing are currently located on the applicant’s performance record.  His DD Form 214 indicates he had 4 months and 9 days of active service which is reflected in item 12c of his DD Form 214. 

7.  On 11 August 1999, the Army Discharge Review Board (ADRB) upgraded the applicant’s discharge to honorable, under Secretarial Authority.  The ADRB determined that the applicant was in an entry-level status and should have been separated under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 11, but was improperly separated under the provisions of chapter 13.  The Board further determined that the characterization of service was inequitable because the applicant’s personal conduct and performance of duty mitigated the discrediting entries in his service record.

CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant’s reduction to E-2 on 8 February 1999 was suspended until    19 March 1999.  The suspension was never vacated and expired without reduction, therefore, the applicant should have been separated in the pay grade of E-3.  

2.  The ADRB determined that the applicant’s initial separation was improper, therefore, in the interest of justice all documents concerning this separation processing should be moved from his performance file to a restricted file.    

3.  The applicant’s time in service is accurately recorded on his DD Form 214.  

4.  In view of the foregoing, the applicant’s records should be corrected 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, to show he was separated in the pay grade of E-3, and 

b.  by transferring all documents relating to his improper separation under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 13, to his restricted file.

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

BOARD VOTE:  

__mdm__  ___clg__  ___ena___  GRANT AS STATED IN RECOMMENDATION

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

________  ________  ________  DENY APPLICATION

		______________________
		        CHAIRPERSON

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2000039829	
SUFFIX		
RECON	YYYYMMDD	
DATE BOARDED	20010109	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE	(HD, GD, UOTHC, UD, BCD, DD, UNCHAR)	
DATE OF DISCHARGE	YYYYMMDD	
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY	AR . . . . .  	
DISCHARGE REASON		
BOARD DECISION	GRANT 	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1. 110.00		
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.