IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 12 December 2017 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20160003525 BOARD VOTE: ________ ________ ________ GRANT FULL RELIEF ________ ________ ________ GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF ________ ________ ________ GRANT FORMAL HEARING ____x___ ___x____ ____x___ DENY APPLICATION 2 Enclosures 1. Board Determination/Recommendation 2. Evidence and Consideration IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 12 December 2017 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20160003525 BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION: The evidence presented does not demonstrate the existence of a probable error or injustice. Therefore, the Board determined that the overall merits of this case are insufficient as a basis to amend the decision of the ABCMR set forth in Docket Number AR2000043964, dated 7 December 2000. ______________x____________ CHAIRPERSON I certify that herein is recorded the true and complete record of the proceedings of the Army Board for Correction of Military Records in this case. IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 12 December 2017 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20160003525 THE BOARD CONSIDERED THE FOLLOWING EVIDENCE: 1. Application for correction of military records (with supporting documents provided, if any). 2. Military Personnel Records and advisory opinions (if any). THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE: 1. The applicant requests reconsideration of the previous Army Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR) decision that was promulgated in Docket Number AR2000043964 on 7 December 2000. Specifically, he requests: * revocation of his discharge * promotion to the highest grade he would have attained with 20 years of service * immediate retirement with back pay and allowances 2. The applicant states his DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) is not right. His command sent the wrong person home and they sent him home without orders. He did not clear the military and he did not report for separation at Fort Jackson, SC. 3. The applicant further states: a. On 7 July 1985, he reported to the 598th Transportation Company (TC) in Germany. There was another Soldier in the company with the same name as his. The other Soldier was the colonel's driver. In March 1986, a urinalysis was conducted and the other Soldier tested positive. b. The command got the two Soldiers mixed up. On 29 December 1986, they sent him home without orders or the benefit of clearing the military. The 598th TC bought the plane ticket to Charlotte, NC, where he entered the military the 2nd time. He waited at the airport for two hours but no one came to pick him up. His wife bought him a bus ticket home. The next day, he went to Fort Gordon, GA. He reported to the inspector general (IG) and reported what had happened, so the sergeant first class (SFC) called St. Louis, MO. They told the SFC that he had a locally imposed bar to reenlistment. He stated he could overcome the bar. He told the SFC that he did not know anything about the bar. The SFC did not check anything out. The date of the "chapter 16" and the bar are the same date. c. Army Regulation (AR) 635-200 (Personnel Separations – Enlisted Personnel), dated 1 October 1982, states "A Member who perceives that they will be unable to overcome a locally imposed bar to reenlistment may apply for immediate discharge. They must complete the review procedure outlined in AR 601-280 [Army Reenlistment Program] before they apply. The Soldier will not be allowed to submit for separation earlier than 6 months from date of imposition of the bar." The date of the bar is 1 December 1986 and "chapter 16" is 1 December 1986. d. He has two DD Forms 214, the first for the period 1 September 1972 through 29 August 1975, following his service in Vietnam, and the second for the period 20 February 1979 through 29 December 1986, when he was separated at Fort Jackson, SC. He was never at Fort Jackson. He did not sign the DD Form 214; however, it has his name on it and it was mailed to him. At the same time, Fort Jackson called and asked him how he got the DD Form 214 and also told him that they did not issue the DD Form 214. He told them it was mailed to him. Also, he was asked how he got on the flight to the United States without orders. He told them the flight attendant did not ask for orders. His company in Germany bought the ticket to Charlotte, NC. He did not have orders and did not clear the military. There is a clearance record with 12 initials. The same person cannot be at those places and yes, his name is on it, but he did not clear. His expiration of term of service (ETS) was 22 August 1988; he had two years left to do. e. Since 29 December 1986, he is been everywhere trying to get this case done. He did clear the military; his name is on most of the paperwork but he did not sign it. He knows his name is there. He is not doing a lawsuit. He wants his records right, his name cleared, and he wants back pay. That is all he is asking; just make it right. He was told by a representative from the American Legion to hire a lawyer. They are going get all of his military records from St. Louis, MO, and they are going to send the records to the Pentagon; the Department of Army and the Department of Defense are going to investigate his military records. f. He has been working on his case since 1 December 1986. He has been everywhere and was not getting any help out of Fort Gordon, GA. He has been getting the run around and he knows he was done wrong. In Germany, the 598th TC was covering for the colonel. It was his driver who was on drugs. They put it on him saying he was the one who was on drugs. He was sent home without orders and he has not cleared the military. He knows nothing about the bar to reenlistment. 4. The applicant provides: * DD Form 214 for the period ending 29 August 1975 * DD Form 214 for the period ending 29 December 1986 * two third-party statements, dated 19 June 2000 * DA Form 2A (Personnel Qualification Record – Part I) * DA Form 2-1 (Personnel Qualification Record – Part II) * DA Form 4188 (Military Personnel Office/Finance Office Verification of Military Personnel Record Jacket) * DA Form 2496 (Disposition Form) * Installation Clearance Record * four awards orders * promotion orders * DA Form 268 (Report for Suspension of Favorable Personnel Actions) * DA Form 1059 (Service School Academic Evaluation Report) * DA Form 1695 (Oath of Extension of Enlistment) * two pages of his previous Army Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR) Record of Proceedings * an extract of AR 601-280 (Army Reenlistment Program) * an extract of AR 635-200 CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE: 1. Incorporated herein by reference are military records that were summarized in the previous consideration of the applicant's case by the ABCMR in Docket Number AR2000043964 on 7 December 2000. 2. The applicant provides as new evidence two third-party statements, DA Form 4188, DA Form 2496, and four sets of awards orders that were not previously reviewed/discussed by the Board during the adjudication of his precious case. These documents are considered new evidence that warrant consideration by the Board. 3. Following prior enlisted service in the Regular Army from 1 September 1972 to 29 August 1975, the applicant reenlisted in the Regular Army on 20 February 1979. He reenlisted again on 23 November 1982 for a period of four years. He was promoted to the rank of sergeant (SGT), and on 19 November 1984, he extended his enlistment for an additional 21 months for the purpose of completing an overseas tour. His DA Form 2-1 shows he arrived in Germany on 9 July 1985. 4. The applicant accepted nonjudicial punishment on 10 April 1986 under the provisions of Article 15 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) for disobeying a lawful order. 5. A DA Form 1059, dated 22 May 1986, shows the applicant attended the Primary Leadership Development Course (PLDC) but failed to achieve course standards. 6. The applicant's Enlisted Evaluation Report covering the period April through December 1986 shows he performed below the standards of a SGT. He was counseled on several occasions regarding his shortcomings and attitude, which failed to improve. He was incapable of safely operating a motor vehicle. His PLDC failure was due to his attitude and his academic shortcomings. The report indicates he was being eliminated from the service for failure to meet Army standards. 7. The applicant's record shows that on 1 December 1986, he submitted a request for early separation under the provisions of AR 635-200, paragraph 16-5b, as a result of a locally imposed bar to reenlistment. On the same date, the applicant's commanding officer recommended favorable consideration of his request for early separation. The date of the imposition of the bar to reenlistment is unknown. 8. On or around 10 December 1986, the separation authority approved the applicant's request for early separation under the provisions of AR 635-200, chapter 16. On 10 December 1986, the applicant was informed of the approval of his request for early separation. He signed a document acknowledging receipt of the correspondence and acknowledged that he understood the its contents. 9. Orders Number 35-1, issued by the 187th Personnel Service Company on 17 December 1986, directed the applicant's reassignment to the U.S. Army Transition Point, Fort Jackson, SC, for separation processing with a report date of 29 December 1986. 10. The applicant's record contain an Installation Clearance Record that shows he completed the military installation/community clearing process. He signed this form on 17 December 1986. 11. The applicant was honorably discharged on 29 December 1986, under the provisions of AR 635-200, paragraph 16-5b, based on a locally imposed bar to reenlistment. His DD Form 214 confirms he was separated at Fort Jackson, SC, and includes his signature. The DD Form 214 also shows he completed 7 years, 10 months, and 10 days of active service during this period and that he had 2 years, 11 months, and 29 days of prior active service. 12. The applicant's available records do not contain evidence that indicates he tested positive for illegal drugs or evidence that shows his separation from the service was due in part to his use of illegal drugs. There is also no evidence that shows he was unjustly treated or punished due to a case of mistaken identity, either pertaining to a urinalysis or otherwise. 13. The applicant provides: a. Two third-party statements, both dated 19 June 2000, which indicate he was not known to be a drug or alcohol abuser. b. A DA Form 4188 containing personal and military data. c. A DA Form 2496, wherein it was requested that the applicant be allowed to clear without his Enlisted Evaluation Report, which was in the process of being finalized. d. Four sets of orders pertaining to awards he received, which are shown on his DD Form 214. REFERENCES: 1. AR 15-185 (ABCMR) provides Department of the Army policy, criteria, and administrative instructions regarding an applicant’s request for the correction of a military record. This regulation provides that the ABCMR will decide cases on the evidence of record; it is not an investigative body. It further provides that the ABCMR begins its consideration of each case with the presumption of administrative regularity. The applicant has the burden of proving an error or injustice by a preponderance of the evidence. 2. AR 601-280 prescribes the eligibility criteria and options available in the Army Reenlistment Program. Chapter 6 of the regulation in effect at the time provided for the barring from reenlistment individuals whose continued active duty was not in the best interest of the military service. This chapter specified that bars would be used when immediate administrative discharge from active service was not warranted. Examples of rationale for reenlistment disqualification are, but not limited to, absent without leave, indebtedness, recurrent nonjudicial punishment, slow promotion progression, no demonstrated potential for future service, and substandard performance of duties. 3. AR 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel. Chapter 16, of the regulation in effect at the time, covered discharges caused by changes in service obligations. Paragraph 16-5 applied to personnel denied reenlistment and provided that Soldiers who received a Department of the Army or locally imposed bars to reenlistment, and who perceive that they would be unable to overcome the bar, could apply for immediate discharge. 4. Title 10, U.S. Code, section 3914, provides that under regulations to be prescribed by the Secretary of the Army, an enlisted member of the Army who has at least 20, but less than 30, years of service computed under section 3925 of this title may, upon his request, be retired. DISCUSSION: 1. The evidence of record shows the applicant voluntarily requested early separation due to a locally imposed bar to reenlistment. The evidence further shows his discharge process under the provisions of AR 635-200, paragraph 16-5b, was administratively correct and in conformance with applicable laws and regulations in effect at the time. 2. The applicant many contentions, including his contention that he was sent home without orders, that he did not clear the military, that he did not sign his DD Form 214, or that the Army sent home the wrong person, are not supported by the available evidence, which clearly shows he was issued separation orders on 17 December 1986 and he was issued an Installation Clearance Form that he signed. 3. The applicant did not complete 20 years of active military service; therefore, he is not entitled to retirement based on length of service or any associated back pay. 4. The documents and statements provided by the applicant with his application do not provide any clear evidence of error or injustice in his separation processing. //NOTHING FOLLOWS// ABCMR Record of Proceedings AR20150000953 Enclosure 1 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20160003525 2 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Enclosure 1 ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20160003525 7 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Enclosure 2