RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


	IN THE CASE OF:	  


	BOARD DATE:	  28 June 2007
	DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20060009033 


	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.




Director


Analyst


The following members, a quorum, were present:



Chairperson


Member



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, in effect, the Board obtain the table of distribution and allowances for the 6th Brigade and confirm that he was serving in an O-6 position.  The applicant further requests:

	a.  a statement explaining the absence of officer evaluation reports (OER) be included in his official military personnel file (OMPF);

	b.  three non-selection for promotion references dated 14 October 1994, 
16 October 1995, and 16 April 2004 be expunged from his record in accordance with the recommendations of this Board in AR2003089931, dated 15 July 2003;

c.  the difference in pay between lieutenant colonel and colonel for the period between 2 March 1998 and 31 August 1998 and a restoration of the retirement points he had earned during that period;

	d.  15 memberships points and a second bronze service star for his National Defense Service Medal for the period 4 May 2004 to 25 May 2004;

	e.  a correction to his original entry date (interpreted to mean his date initial entry military service [DIEMS]), currently shown as 1 July 1970; and

	f.  he be given qualifying years of service from 31 August 1998 to 17 May 2004.

2.  The applicant states, in effect, he has repeatedly, without success, requested the table of distribution and allowances for the 6th Brigade.  The applicant further states:

	a.  a statement concerning the absence of OERs, as recommended by this Board, has not been included in his OMPF.  The applicant further states that this directive was made to avoid prejudice in the consideration of any future personnel actions and clearly envisions that the Board originally intended to return him to an active status;

	b.  the Board ordered, in AR2003089931, that all records concerning non-selection be expunged from his OMPF;

	c.  he performed active duty and attended drills during the period from 
2 March 1998 to 31 August 1998;

	d.  he was recalled to an active status during the period from 4 May 2004 to 25 May 2004; and

	e.  his initial date of entry was 1 July 1965 as shown by his DD Form 214 (Armed Forces of the United States Report of Transfer or Discharge) with an effective date of 5 January 1966.  The applicant further states he received a medical discharge from the United States Military Academy.

3.  The applicant provides excerpts from his OMPF, three affidavits, and a copy of his DD Form 214 with an effective date of 5 January 1966, from the U.S. Military Academy, West Point, New York. 

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  The applicant’s request for and attempts to obtain the table of distribution and allowances for the 6th Brigade is an issue he should address under the Freedom of Information Act.  This does not constitute a request for correction to a record.  Therefore, this portion of the applicant’s application does not fall within the jurisdiction of the ABCMR and will not be discussed further in this case.

2.  A review of the applicant's record in The Personnel Electronic Records Management System (PERMS) shows that the HRC Memorandum for Record, dated 4 October 2006, showing the applicant’s non-rated period is properly filed in the applicant's record in PERMS.  Therefore, this issue will not be discussed further in this case.

3.  The staff of the ABCMR contacted the Defense Finance and Accounting Services (DFAS), Denver.  As a result of this coordinated effort, the DFAS has informed the Board that the difference in pay between lieutenant colonel and colonel for the period between 2 March 1998 and 31 August 1998 was paid to the applicant on 22 May 2007.  Therefore, this issue will not be discussed further in this case.

4.  Incorporated herein by reference are military records which were summarized in the previous consideration of the applicant's cases by the Army Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR) in Docket Numbers AR2003089931, dated 15 July 2003 and AR20040002190, dated 29 September 2005.

5.  A Standby Advisory Board (STAB) (now known as a Special Selection Board [SSB]) convened on 10 September 2003 did not select the applicant for promotion under 1996 promotion standards.  An SSB convened on 
17 September 2003 selected the applicant for promotion to colonel under 1997 promotion standards with a date of rank of 2 March 1998.
6.  Headquarters, 104th Division, Vancouver, Washington Orders 04-12400001, dated 3 May 2004, revoked Headquarters, 104th Division, Vancouver, Washington Orders 98-149-001, dated 29 May 1998, that had transferred the applicant to the Retired Reserve effective 23 August 1998.  Headquarters, 
U.S. Army Human Resources Command, St. Louis, Missouri Orders 
C-05-412726, dated 25 May 2004, transferred the applicant to the Retired Reserve effective 1 August 2000, based on action by this Board, by order of the Secretary.

7.  In the processing of this case, an advisory opinion was obtained from the Special Actions Branch, Office of Promotions, Reserve Components, HRC St. Louis.  HRC states the applicant was selected for promotion to colonel by a SSB held in September 2003 under calendar year 1997 criteria.  The applicant’s retirement orders were revoked, the applicant was placed in the Individual Ready Reserve, and he was promoted to colonel with an effective date of 2 March 1998. HRC further states the applicant’s non-select for promotion letters have been removed form his OMPF and the non-rated statement, dated 4 October 2005 covers the absence of missing officer evaluation reports from September 1997 - 1 August 2000.

8.  The applicant was provided an opportunity to review the HRC-St. Louis advisory opinion and provided a rebuttal.  The applicant feels that the statement for unrated periods should cover the period from September 1997 to 25 May 2004.  The applicant states he was erroneously retired a second time.

9.  A letter, dated 22 November 2005, from the Army Review Boards Agency, Support Division, St. Louis, Missouri, provided the applicant with a corrected copy of his Chronological Statement of Retirement Points (CSRP).  The CSRP shows the applicant was credited with 86 retirement points for retirement year ending 23 July 1999, and 84 retirement points for retirement year ending 23 July 2000, thereby giving him 30 years qualifying for retirement at his new mandatory retirement date.

10.  The DIEMS date is the earliest date of enlistment, induction, or appointment in a regular or reserve component of an uniformed service as a commissioned officer, warrant officer, or enlisted member.  A DIEMS date is rarely the same as a basic active service date (BASD) and often earlier than a pay entry basic date (PEBD).  Situations where the DIEMS date will likely be earlier than the PEBD include academy graduates.  The DIEMS date is the date the soldier entered the academy.  This is significant since Academy time is not creditable for retired pay purposes (for officers).  If the officer had enlisted or Reserve service before entering the Academy, the DIEMS date would be the date that service began.  

11.  Army Regulation 600-8-22 (Military Awards) provides, in pertinent part, that the National Defense Service Medal is awarded for honorable active service for any period between 27 July 1950 through 27 July 1954, 1 January 1961 through 
14 August 1974, 2 August 1990 through 30 November 1995 and 11 September 2001 to a date to be determined.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  This Board’s consideration in AR20040002190 specifically denied the applicant’s request to return to an active status in the Ready Reserve.  The applicant was transferred to the Retired Reserve because, after he was credited with service as a result of the Board’s approved recommendation, he had reached his mandatory removal date in accordance with Title 10, United States Code (USC), section 14507(b).

2.  This Board only directed that any record of failure to be selected for promotion to colonel be removed from the applicant’s records if an SSB later selected him for promotion under the criteria in effect during that year.  Therefore, any previous or subsequent non-selections by an RCSB would remain in the applicant’s OMPF.  

3.  The applicant’s effective date of transfer to the Retired Reserve was revised from 23 August 1998 to 1 August 2000 in compliance with the provisions of AR20040002190.  The dates of the orders (4 May 2004 and 25 May 2004) used to accomplish this do not constitute a return to an active status.  Therefore, the applicant is not entitled to any membership points or a second bronze service for his National Defense Service Medal for the period from 4 May 2004 to 25 May 2004.

4.  The evidence shows the applicant was credited sufficient retirement points for retirement year 23 July 1999 and 23 July 2000 to enable him to transfer to the Retired Reserve with 30 qualifying years.  Therefore, there is no error in the applicant’s CSRP.

5.  The applicant was transferred to the Retired Reserve effective 1 August 2000 in accordance with Title 10 USC section 14507(b) and section 1370(d)(3)(A)(B)(i) based on the corrections made in AR2003089931 and AR20040002190.  Therefore, there is no error in his return to the Retired Reserve effective 1 August 2000.

6.  The applicant’s DD Form 214, with an effective date of 5 January 1965, shows the applicant’s initial entry in military service was 1 July 1965.  Therefore, it is appropriate to change the applicant’s DIEMS to 1 July 1965.
BOARD VOTE:

________  ________  ________  GRANT FULL RELIEF 

___jtm___  ____dac_  ___wfc__  GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF 

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

________  ________  ________  DENY APPLICATION

BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION:

1.  The Board determined that the evidence presented was sufficient to warrant a recommendation for partial relief.  As a result, the Board recommends that all Department of the Army records of the individual concerned be corrected by  showing the applicant’s DIEMS is 1 July 1965.

2.  The Board further determined that the evidence presented is insufficient to warrant a portion of the requested relief.  As a result, the Board recommends denial of so much of the application that pertains to removal of additional references of denial for promotion, additional membership points, a return to active status, and a second bronze service star for his National Defense Service Medal.  
 



_________John T. Meixell__________
          CHAIRPERSON




INDEX

CASE ID
AR20060009033
SUFFIX

RECON
YYYYMMDD
DATE BOARDED
20070628
TYPE OF DISCHARGE
(HD, GD, UOTHC, UD, BCD, DD, UNCHAR)
DATE OF DISCHARGE
YYYYMMDD
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY
AR . . . . .  
DISCHARGE REASON

BOARD DECISION
PARTIAL GRANT
REVIEW AUTHORITY

ISSUES         1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.