SUPPLEMENTAL PROCEEDINGS

	IN THE CASE OF:      

	BOARD DATE:           18 July 2002
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR2002076025

	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.  A quorum was present during the further consideration and deliberation.  The findings appearing in proceedings dated 25 September 2001 were affirmed.  The following additional findings, conclusions, and recommendation were adopted by the Board.

	Mr. Carl W. S. Chun		Director	
	Mr. Jessie B. Strickland		Analyst	

	The Board convened at the call of the Director on the above date to reconsider the conclusions and recommendation appearing in proceedings dated 25 September 2001.

	Mr. Raymond V. O’Connor, Jr.		Chairperson	
	Mr. John P. Infante		Member	
	Mr. Stanley Kelley		Member	

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

	The Board considered the following additional evidence:

	Exhibit 

THE BOARD ADDITIONALLY FINDS:

16.  On 16 July 2002, officials at the Defense Finance and Accounting Service (DFAS) contacted a staff member of the Board regarding the Record of Proceedings dated 25 September 2001 (AR2001052699) in which the Board granted the applicant separation pay as a result of being twice non-selected for promotion to the rank of major.  Officials at the DFAS indicated that because the proceedings did not specify “FULL” or “ONE-HALF” separation pay, he was given “ONE-HALF” separation pay.  A staff member of the Board informed officials at the DFAS that it was the Board’s intention that the applicant receive “FULL” separation pay and that a Supplemental Proceedings would be prepared to reflect the Board’s intent. 

THE BOARD ADDITIONALLY CONCLUDES: 

7.  At the time of the Board’s 25 September 2001 decision in this case, it was the intent of the Board to grant the applicant “FULL” separation pay as a result of his being twice nonselected for promotion to the rank of major.

8.  However, because the Board did not specify in its proceedings the amount of separation he was to receive, he has been denied a benefit that the Board had intended to grant him in its original deliberation. 

9.  In view of the foregoing findings and conclusions, it would be appropriate to correct the applicant’s records as recommended below.

THE BOARD RECOMMENDS:

That all of the Department of the Army records related to this case be corrected by amending the Board’s recommendation appearing in the proceedings, dated 25 September 2001 (AR2001052699), to show that the individual is entitled to receive “FULL” separation pay.

BOARD VOTE:
__sk____  ___rvo __  ___jpi___  GRANT AS STATED IN RECOMMENDATION

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

________  ________  ________  DENY APPLICATION

		__Raymond V. O’Connor, Jr.__
		        CHAIRPERSON

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2002076025	
SUFFIX		
RECON	YYYYMMDD	
DATE BOARDED	2002/07/18	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE		
DATE OF DISCHARGE		
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY		
DISCHARGE REASON		
BOARD DECISION	GRANT	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.  291	128.0800/sep pay	
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.