IN THE CASE OF:	  

		BOARD DATE:	      24 SEPTEMBER 2009

		DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20090010977 


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, in effect, removal of a DA Form 4991-R (Declination of Continued Service Statement (DCSS)) and a duplicate Army Achievement Medal (AAM) from his Official Military Personnel File (OMPF).   

2.  The applicant states, in effect, the DCSS needs to be removed from his OMPF or placed with his reenlistment packet, dated 29 May 2001.  He claims he reenlisted and was told this document would never reach his record since he reenlisted in the Army.  He also requests a duplicate AAM in his records, dated 10 December 1997 with Permanent Orders (PO) 328-1 be removed from his OMPF.  

3.  The applicant provides the following documents in support of his application:  DA Form 4199-R, dated 24 January 2001; U.S. Total Army Personnel Command (TAPC) memorandum, subject: Request for Withdrawal of DCSS (applicant's name and social security number), dated 15 May 2001; DD Form 4 (Enlistment /Reenlistment Document Armed Forces of the United States), dated 29 May 2001; and AAM Certificate, dated 10 December 1997.  


CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  The applicant's record shows that he initially enlisted in the Regular Army (RA) and entered active duty in 1995.  He was still serving on active duty, in the rank/grade of staff sergeant (SSG)/E-6, on the date of his application. 

2.  On 24 January 2001, while serving in Germany, the applicant signed a DCSS declining to satisfy the service remaining requirement necessary for him to comply with assignment instructions for Fort Sill, OK.  The form confirms a career counselor advised the applicant of the options available to acquire sufficient service to satisfy the commitment and that the applicant refused to take the necessary action to meet the length of service requirement.  The career counselor further advised the applicant of the career effects of the DCSS.  

3.  On 15 May 2001, the Chief, Retention Management Division, TAPC,  approved the applicant's request for withdrawal of the 24 January 2001 DCSS, provided the applicant was otherwise qualified and reenlisted to meet the service remaining requirement for an assignment to Fort Hood, Texas.  The approval memorandum directed the Personnel Service Center (PSC) to file the original copy of this action in the applicant's OMPF and to place a copy of the action in the action pending section of the applicant's Military Personnel Records Jacket (MPRJ) until the applicant's permanent change of station to Fort Hood, TX.  

4.  A review of the applicant's OMPF shows that the DCSS remains on file in the service (S) portion of the OMPF and in the applicant's MPRJ.  The TAPC withdrawal approval memorandum and the applicant's 2001 DD Form 4 are not on file in the OMPF.

5.  The applicant's OMPF contains three AAM certificates, dated 18 September 1996, 10 December 1997, and 15 December 1997, respectively.  The 10 and 15 December 1997 certificates both indicate the award was for the meritorious service of the applicant while he was assigned to Charlie Battery, 3rd Battalion, 27th Field Artillery Regiment (MLRS) and the citations are identical.  The 
10 December 1997 certificate indicates the award was authorized and announced in Permanent Orders 328-1, dated 10 December 1997, and the 15 December 1997 certificate indicates the award was authorized and announced in Permanent Orders 349-2, dated 15 December 1997.  


6.  Army Regulation 600-8-104 (Military Personnel Information Management/ Records) prescribes the policies and mandated operating tasks for the Military Personnel (MILPER) Information Management/Records Program of the Military Personnel System.  Chapter 2 contains guidance on initiating and maintaining the OMPF and states, in pertinent part, that once placed in the OMPF, a document becomes a permanent part of the file and will not be removed or moved unless directed by an authorized agency.  

7.  Table 2-1 of the same regulation identifies the composition of the OMPF and indicates, in pertinent part, that DA Forms 4991-R will be filed in the SC (service computation) section of the Service (S) portion of the OMPF, which consists of the service SC and GA (general administration) sections.  It also indicates, in pertinent part, that the DD Form 4, with allied papers, will be filed in the GA section of the S portion of the OMPF. 

8.  Army Regulation 601-280 (Army Retention Program) prescribes criteria for the Army Retention Program and sets forth policies and command responsibilities for the immediate reenlistment or extension of enlistment of Soldiers.  Chapter 4 contains guidance on reenlistment, extensions of enlistment, and DCSSs.  Paragraph 4-11 contains guidance on the use of the DCSS and states, in pertinent part, that Soldiers, other than those on their initial term, who have 4 or more years of service must take action to meet service remaining requirements (SRR).  Soldiers eligible, but refusing to take action to satisfy military SRRs will be denied further service through the DA Form 4991-R unless covered by an identified exception.  

9.  Paragraph 4-12 of the retention regulation contains guidance on the execution and processing of the DA Form 4991-R and states, in pertinent part, that Soldiers indicating a desire to refuse to take action to meet an SRR will be advised by the servicing Career Counselor regarding the impact of the refusal.  The servicing Career Counselor will initiate DA Form 4991-R no later than 45 days from the date the member was notified of the assignment.  Paragraph 4-13 contains guidance on the disposition of the DA Form 4991-R and states, in pertinent part, that the original document is forwarded for permanent filing in the OMPF.  A duplicate copy will be filed in the Soldier's Military Personnel Records Jacket (MPRJ) and an additional copy will be forwarded to the appropriate branch at the Army Human Resources Command (HRC), Alexandria, Virginia.  


DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant's contention that the DCSS on file in his OMPF should be removed because he ultimately reenlisted was carefully considered.  However, there is insufficient evidence to support this claim.  

2.  The evidence of record confirms the applicant declined to satisfy the SRR for assignment to Fort Sill, and that he completed a DCSS on 24 January 2001.  All regulatory requirements were met and the applicant was properly counseled regarding the impact of the DCSS before it was forwarded for filing in his OMPF in accordance with the applicable regulation.  As a result, there was no error or injustice related to the processing or filing of this document in his OMPF when it was completed.  

3.  Further, TAPC directed that the original copy of the subsequent approval of the applicant's request to withdraw the DCSS be filed in the OMPF and this document is in fact on file in the applicant's OMPF along with the original DCSS.  As a result, there also appears to be no error or injustice related to the current filing of the DCSS, which is now accompanied by the withdrawal approval. 

4.  The applicant's contention that his OMPF contains a duplicate AAM certificate that should be removed was also carefully considered.  A review of the applicant's OMPF confirms that duplicate certificates were issued for the same award of the AAM for meritorious service in December 1997.  The first certificate is dated 10 December 1997 and the second is dated 15 December 1997.  The 10 December 1997 remains valid and should remain on file in the OMPF.  The certificate, dated 15 December 1997, is a duplicate and should be removed from the OMPF at this time.  

BOARD VOTE:

________  ________  ________  GRANT FULL RELIEF 

____X____  ____X____  ___X_____  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 removing the Army Achievement Medal certificate, dated 15 December 1997, from his OMPF.  

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 removing the Declination of Continued Service Statement, dated 24 January 2001 from his OMPF. 




      ____________XXX__________
               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.

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20090010977



3


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20090010977



2


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1