RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


      IN THE CASE OF:


      BOARD DATE:         02 SEPTEMBER 2004
      DOCKET NUMBER:  AR2003099589


      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. Deborah L. Brantley           |     |Senior Analyst       |


      The following members, a quorum, were present:

|     |Mr. Walter Morrison               |     |Chairperson          |
|     |Mr. William Powers                |     |Member               |
|     |Mr. Ronald Weaver                 |     |Member               |

      The Board considered the following evidence:

      Exhibit A - Application for correction of military records.

      Exhibit B - Military Personnel Records (including advisory opinion,
if any).

THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE:

1.  The applicant requests that the erroneous National Guard Bureau (NGB)
Form 22 (Report of Separation and Record of Service), currently in his OMPF
(Official Military Personnel File), be replaced by the correct form which
was published by the Mississippi National Guard.

2.  The applicant states that instead of publishing a NGB Form 22A
(Correction to NGB Form 22), an entirely new NGB Form 22 was issued.
However, the original NGB Form 22 was filed in his OMPF.  He states that
items that were incorrect on the original NGB Form 22 included his pay
grade, date of rank, birth date, record of service, and military education.

3.  The applicant provides a copy of the new NGB Form 22 in support of his
request.

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  Records available to the Board indicate that the applicant enlisted in
the Mississippi Army National Guard on 23 December 1991 and was trained as
an administrative specialist.  A 1993 Army Achievement Medal confirms that
by time he was awarded that decoration he had been promoted to pay grade E-
4 in the Army National Guard.  Documents in his file confirm that his date
of birth was
20 December 1973.

2.  In the fall of 1994 the applicant signed a ROTC (Reserve Officers’
Training Corps) scholarship cadet contract, but continued his membership in
the Army National Guard, while pursuing his college degree.

3.  Orders issued by the State of Mississippi Adjutant General’s Office
indicate the applicant was discharged in the rank of sergeant (cadet) on 9
May 1996 in order to accept a commission as a Regular Army officer.  At the
time of his discharge he would have been a member of the Army National
Guard for 4 years, 4 months, and 17 days.

4.  The NGB Form 22, contained in the applicant’s OMPF, indicates that he
was honorably discharged from the Army National Guard on 9 May 1996 to
accept appointment as a commissioned officer.  That document indicates that
he was released in pay grade E-4, with a date of rank of 13 October 1992,
that his date



of birth was 20 September 1973, that he had 2 years, 9 months, and 14 days
of service, with 4 months and 12 days of prior active service for a total
of 3 years, 1 month, and 26 days.  The document also indicated that he had
75 weeks of ROTC as a member of the SMP (simultaneous membership program)
in item 19 (military education).  The applicant was not available to sign
the separation document.

5.  The Mississippi National Guard published a new NGB Form 22 correcting
the erroneous information on the original separation document.  There is no
information in available records why the Mississippi National Guard chose
to issue an entirely new document rather than prepare a NGB Form 22A.  The
new form is not currently filed in the applicant’s OMPF.  The same
individual, a major in the Mississippi National Guard who was serving as
the Administrative/Logistics Officer, authenticated both versions of the
NGB Form 22.

6.  Army Regulation 600-8-104, which establishes the policies and
provisions for the initiation and maintenance of the OMPF states that the
NGB Form 22 and NGB Form 22A will be filed in the OMPF in the SC (service
computation) portion of the service (S) fiche.  It also states that once
placed in the OMPF, the document becomes a permanent part of that file and
will not be removed from a fiche or moved to another part of the fiche
unless directed by one of several agencies, including this Board.  It does
provide for the custodian of the OMPF (United States Army Human Resources
Command-Arlington in the case of officers) to transfer a document
mistakenly filed on the S fiche.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant’s original NGB Form 22 was filed appropriately in his
OMPF and as such, the custodian of the applicant’s OMPF cannot effect the
necessary correction.

2.  While it is unclear why the Mississippi National Guard corrected
erroneous information on that original form by issuing an entirely new NGB
Form 22 and not a NGB Form 22A, the evidence does show that there were in
fact errors on the original form; in spite of the fact that not all of the
errors are verifiable based on records currently available to the Board.
However, there is no reason to doubt the validity of the information
reflected on the new NGB Form 22.

3.  While the appropriate avenue to correct the situation would be to have
the Mississippi National Guard revoke the new NGB Form 22 and issue a NGB
Form 22A, such an action might only serve to further confuse the situation.
 As such, the Board concludes, in the interest of justice and equity, that
it would be appropriate to transfer the existing NGB Form 22 to the
restricted portion of the applicant’s OMPF and replace it with the correct
versions of the form.  Placing the original NGB Form 22 in the restricted
fiche, along with the Board’s proceedings, will maintain an unbroken,
historical record of the applicant’s service.

BOARD VOTE:

___WM__  ___WP__  ___RW__  GRANT FULL RELIEF

________  ________  ________  GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

________  ________  ________  DENY APPLICATION

BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION:

The Board determined that the evidence presented was sufficient to warrant
a recommendation for relief.  As a result, the Board recommends that all
Department of the Army records of the individual concerned be corrected by
expunging the existing NGB Form 22 from the applicant’s OMPF and replacing
it with the correct version of the form.




                                  ____  Walter Morrison______
                                            CHAIRPERSON



                                    INDEX

|CASE ID                 |AR2003099589                            |
|SUFFIX                  |                                        |
|RECON                   |YYYYMMDD                                |
|DATE BOARDED            |20040902                                |
|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.                      |                                        |


-----------------------
[pic]