PROCEEDINGS

	IN THE CASE OF:       

	BOARD DATE:            16 April 2002                  
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR2001065377

	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	
	Mr. Lee Cates		Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Ms. Irene N. Wheelwright		Chairperson	
	Ms. Melinda M. Darby		Member	
	Mr. John T. Meixell		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 records be corrected to show that item            5 (Department, Component and Branch or Class), DD Form 214 (Report of Separation from Active Duty), dated 23 December 1976, reads ARMY. 

3.  The applicant states that he was on active duty for 9 months in Germany, therefore item # 5 should not include ARNG (Army National Guard) because due to this legend he is in trouble every time he presents his DD Form 214 and requests benefits due to his active duty.

4.  The applicant’s military records show that he enlisted in the Puerto Rico Army National Guard (PRARNG) for 6 years on 24 January 1974.  He was discharged on 16 February 1976.  During the period 11 April to 11 August 1974, he served on Initial Active Duty Training (IADT), a period of 4 months and 1 day.  He was discharged with a characterization of service of general, under honorable conditions based on his unsatisfactory participation.

5.  On 17 February 1976, he was involuntarily ordered to active duty as a Reserve of the Army (USAR) based on his unsatisfactory participation in the PRARNG.

6.  On 30 August 1976, he was issued nonjudicial punishment under Article 15, Uniform Code of Military Justice for being absent from his place of duty (Guard Duty) on 24 August 1976.  His punishment included 14 days restriction, 14 days extra duty, reduction to pay grade E-2 and forfeiture of $93.

7.  On 28 October 1976, his unit commander advised him that he intended to recommend him for an honorable discharge under Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 5 (Expeditious Discharge Program), based on his poor attitude, lack of motivation, inability to adapt emotionally and his failure to demonstrate promotion potential.  The commander indicated he had been formally counseled on             six occasions.  He acknowledged his commander’s notification, consented to the proposed discharge action and declined to make a statement in his own behalf.

8.  On 19 November 1976, the appropriate separation authority approved the request and directed he be issued an honorable discharge.

9.  On 23 December 1976, he was discharged under honorable conditions under the above-cited regulation for his failure to maintain acceptable standards for retention.  His separation document indicates he had 10 months and 7 days of creditable service.

10.  His DD Form 214 incorrectly shows his service in item 18 (Record of Service), (b) (Prior Active Service) as 00/00/00, and (d) (Prior Inactive Service) as 02/00/23.

11.  His DD Form 214 incorrectly shows his character of service as under honorable conditions.  It should be honorable with an Honorable Discharge Certificate (DD Form 256A).

12.  Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations - Enlisted Personnel), chapter 5, then in effect, indicates a person will be discharged from the Army because of existence of one or more of the following conditions:  (a) Poor attitude.  (b) Lack of motivation.  (c) Lack of self-discipline.  (d) Inability to adapt socially or emotionally.  (e) Failure to demonstrate promotion potential.  Service was normally characterized as general, under honorable conditions.

13.  Army Regulation 635-5 (Personnel Separation Documents) indicates, in pertinent part, that the department and component be shown for reserve component soldiers.

CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The evidence of record clearly shows that ARNG should not be used in item  5 of the applicant’s DD Form 214.  It shows that USAR should be used since he was ordered to active duty in the Reserve Component.  Therefore, this item should be corrected accordingly.

2.  The Board notes that item 18 (Record of Service), (b) (Prior Active Service) should read 00 04 01 and item (d) (Prior Inactive Service) should read 01 08 22, based on the applicant’s completion of his IADT.

3.  The Board also notes that item 9 (Type of Separation), of the applicants DD Form 214, e. (Character of Service) incorrectly shows “UNDER HONORABLE CONDITIONS” and f. (Type of Certificate Issued) as “257A”.  The appropriate separation authority directed “SM will be issued an Honorable Discharge upon separation, DD Form 256A [Honorable Discharge Certificate]…”

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 issuing the individual concerned a new DD Form 214, showing he was honorably discharged; by issuing him a DD Form 256A; by showing his department-component was ARMY-USAR; by showing his prior active service was 00 04 01; and, by showing his prior inactive service was 01 08 22.

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

BOARD VOTE:  

_jtm____  _mmd____  __jtm___ GRANT AS STATED IN RECOMMENDATION

________  ________  ________ GRANT FORMAL HEARING

________  ________  ________ DENY APPLICATION

			Irene N. Wheelwright
		______________________
		        CHAIRPERSON

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2001065377	
SUFFIX		
RECON		
DATE BOARDED	20020416	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE		
DATE OF DISCHARGE		
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY		
DISCHARGE REASON		
BOARD DECISION	GRANT	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.	100	
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.