PROCEEDINGS


         IN THE CASE OF:
        

         BOARD DATE: 6 September 2001
         DOCKET NUMBER: AR2001053703


         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. Walter Avery, Jr.		Analyst

The following members, a quorum, were present:

Mr. Luther L. Santiful		Chairperson
Mr. Melvin H. Meyer		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 he reenlisted on 9 April 2000.

3. The applicant states that on 21 January 2000 he relocated from Puerto Rico to Connecticut. He was a reservist and this of course necessitated a change of units. He attended his first drill with a new unit on 8 – 9 April 2000. On 12 May 2000, he was informed that his expiration term of service (ETS) of 9 April 2000 had passed. He was under the belief that his ETS was 14 May 2000. On 1 August 2000, he executed a reenlistment contract; however, his records now reflect a break in service period of 9 April to 1 August 2000. He believes his records should not reflect a break in service.

4. In support of his request he submits a copy of his armed forces identification (ID) card which reflects an expiration date of 14 May 2000 and a supporting statement.

5. The applicant’s military records show that he enlisted into the US Army Reserve (USAR) on 15 May 1988, for a period of six years, establishing an ETS of 14 May 1994; while in Puerto Rico, he reenlisted on 10 April 1994 for a period of six years, establishing an ETS of 9 April 2000.

6. A copy of his ID card reflects an expiration date of 14 May 2000. The ID card is not the official source document to establish a soldier’s ETS, however in the case of enlisted personnel the expiration date listed on their ID cards often matches their ETS date.

7. On 12 May 2000, the unit retention noncommissioned officer (NCO) wrote that the applicant contacted her regarding reenlistment. On 14 May 2000 and after obtaining the applicant’s records it was noted that his ETS date of 9 April 2000 had passed. The unit retention NCO then provided the applicant with a list of options. One of those options was that the applicant could continue drilling and receive pay. It was also noted that the applicant’s first drill with the unit was the weekend of 8 – 9 April 2000.

8. On 1 August 2000, the applicant reenlisted in the USAR for a period of six years.

9. An undated letter indicates the applicant’s commander requested authorization to antedate the applicant’s reenlistment contract. It explains that the applicant was assigned to the unit effective 15 March 2000. During his first drill with the unit on 8 – 9 April 2000, his official military records had not arrived and the only available document – the applicant’s ID Card, reflected an ETS date of 14 May 2000. Upon receipt of his military personnel records it was determined that the applicant’s actual ETS date was 9 April 2000.

10. On 4 December 2000, the Army Reserve Personnel Command (ARPERSCOM) denied the commander’s requests to antedate the applicant’s reenlistment contract stating there was no regulatory provisions that would allow ARPERSCOM to antedate a contract for the applicant at that time. The applicant was advised to appeal to this Board.

11. A DA Form 1380 (Record of Individual Performance of Reserve Duty Training), reflects that the applicant attended drill with the 405^th Combat Support Hospital on 8 – 9 April 2000.

12. A Retirement Points Accounting System Detail Points Inquiry Update reflects that the applicant attended drill during the months of April, May, June, July, and August 2000.

13. On 20 April 2000, a DA Form 2A (Personnel Qualification Record) was prepared on the applicant. Item 10 (Expiration of Troop Program Unit Service) reflects the date 14 May 2000. This date indicates the expiration of the period a soldier is currently obligated or expected to serve in the selected reserve.

14. His Leave and Earning Statement for the period of 2 June 2000 reflects an ETS of 9 April 2000, and indicates that he attended drill on 20, 21 May 2000.

15. AR 140-111 provides, in pertinent part, that an enlisted soldier may not be held in service beyond the normal ETS unless the ETS is extended by law. When through administrative error, or for the convenience of the Government, the reenlistment of a soldier has been delayed through no fault of the soldier, Commander, ARPERSCOM, may authorize the reenlistment agreement to be antedated. No reenlistment will be antedated without the prior approval of Commanding General, ARPERSCOM.

16. AR 135-178 provides, in pertinent part, that a soldier is entitled to be discharged on the expiration of his or her service obligation, and normally will discharged unless action is taken to retain the soldier beyond such expiration date. On the other hand, if the Army does not affirmatively act to discharge a soldier and the soldier does not demand discharge, but rather remains on duty and accepts pay and benefits, the military status of that soldier continues.

CONCLUSIONS:

1. The applicant’s records reveal that his ETS was 9 April 2000, but was recorded as 14 May 2000 on several of his personnel documents. His ID card also had an expiration date 14 May 2000. The applicant appeared to have mistaken the expiration date on his ID card as being the same as his ETS date. The applicant was allowed to attend drill, despite having passed his ETS date. A retirement points accounting system report reflects that he received retirement points for the months of April, May, June, July, and August 2000, indicating that he attended drills in those months and qualified for retirement points. The applicant’s commander erred by knowingly allow the applicant to drill beyond his ETS, reenlisting him and afterwards requesting an antedated reenlistment contract. ARPERSCOM denied that request. The regulation governing the antedating procedure requires that permission to antedate a reenlistment contract must be sought prior to the reenlistment. Because of this error the applicant was directed to seek relief from this Board.

2. In addition, the Army issued no discharge orders and the applicant voluntarily continued to drill and receive pay for attendance; therefore, the Board has determined his active reserve military status continued and it would be unfair not to give the applicant service credit for the period 8 April to 1 August 2000. His records should be corrected to show that he reenlisted on 7 April 2000.

3. In view of the foregoing, the applicant’s records should be corrected as recommended below.

RECOMMENDATION:

That all of the Department of the Army records related to this case be corrected by amending the latest reenlistment document of the individual concerned to show a date of reenlistment of 7 April 2000.

BOARD VOTE:

________ ________ ________ GRANT AS STATED IN RECOMMENDATION

________ ________ ________ GRANT FORMAL HEARING

_jtm ___ ___mhm_ ___lls___ DENY APPLICATION




                  __________Luther L. Santiful____
                  CHAIRPERSON

---

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2001053703
SUFFIX
RECON	YYYYMMDD
DATE BOARDED	20010906
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.	113.01
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.