IN THE CASE OF:	  

		BOARD DATE:	  28 April 2015

		DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20140016251 


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 reconsideration of his earlier request to correct his 
DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active duty) for the period ending on 31 December 2008 to show his place of entry on active duty (EAD) as Fort Hood, Texas.  He also requests, as a new issue, correction of this same document to show his home of record (HOR) as being in the state of Texas.

2.  The applicant states that he strongly believes the original record of proceedings (ROP) overlooked some facts.  His DD Form 4 (Enlistment/ Reenlistment Document), dated 13 September 1995, shows he reenlisted while stationed at Fort Hood, Texas.  However, he was not actually discharged until 
13 December 1995, while serving at Fort Rucker, Alabama.  He reenlisted for the option to become a warrant officer.  For that reason, he was on temporary duty (TDY) at Fort Rucker to complete training.  This is a normal Army business practice.  Upon completion he was appointed as a warrant officer one in the U.S. Army Reserve and ordered to active duty.  Because he could not be both a warrant officer and a noncommissioned officer at the same time, a DD Form 214 had to be issued.  The process and procedures of becoming a warrant officer were not clear and caused an injustice not only to the applicant, but also to the entire warrant officer community.  He argues that he conducted a poll of one hundred retired warrant officers who included friends and their friends.  The poll consisted of these two questions: 1.  Did you attend the Warrant Officer Candidate School at Fort Rucker, Alabama?  All answered "Yes."  2.  Does Fort Rucker, Alabama, appear anywhere in your DD Form 214?  This time everyone answered "No."  If the reason for denial of his request is that he was serving at Fort Rucker, then it should be recognized that he was only there in a TDY status while attending training.  His poll reflects a 100 percent error in all retired warrant officer DD Forms 214.  Therefore, the problem is much bigger and does not apply only to him.  He concludes with the argument that all of his supporting documents originated at Fort Hood, Texas.  This is proof that he was serving there.  That is clear and should be understood.  Even his previous DD Forms 214 show Texas as his residence.  Therefore, not only is block 7a of his DD Form 214 in error, so is block 7b which should show his HOR as Texas.  Please reconsider this request for reconsideration.  Thank you.

3.  The applicant provides a copy of the original ROP, dated 19 September 2013, with cover letter dated 24 September 2013.

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  Incorporated herein by reference are military records which were summarized in the previous consideration of the applicant's case by the Army Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR) in Docket Number AR20130002263, on 19 September 2013.

2.  The applicant's new argument is considered new evidence that requires Board consideration.  Because his new issue is closely related to the original issue, they both can be considered at the same time.

3.  The original ROP shows that the Board considered all of the available evidence concerning the applicant's EAD.  That evidence clearly showed that he had last EAD at Fort Rucker, Alabama, in conjunction with his appointment to warrant officer one with concurrent call to active duty.  The Board also noted that his DD Form 214 for his last period of service incorrectly showed his EAD as being in Puerto Rico, but argued that because the applicant had asked for the entry to show Texas, which would also be incorrect, no change should be made.

4.  A review of the applicant's enlistment/reenlistment documents from 1981 through 1995 show that he had consistently maintained the same address in Puerto Rico as his permanent address and HOR.

5.  Orders 335-00250-A-1067, Fort Rucker, Alabama, dated 1 December 1995, announced the applicant's order to active duty as a warrant officer one effective 14 December 1995.  The place of EAD is clearly stated as Fort Rucker, Alabama.  This order also clearly states his HOR as being in Puerto Rico.

6.  The applicant's DD Form 214 for the period ending 31 December 2008 shows both his EAD and HOR as Puerto Rico.
7.  Army Regulation 601-280 (Army Retention Program) prescribes the criteria for the Army retention program.  Table 11-1 of this regulation defines the HOR as the place recorded as the home of the individual when commissioned, appointed, enlisted, inducted, or ordered into the relevant tour of active duty.  The place recorded as the home of the individual when reinstated, reappointed, or reenlisted remains the same as that recorded when commissioned, appointed, enlisted, or inducted or ordered into the relevant tour of active duty unless there is a break in service of more than 1 full day.  Only if a break in service exceeds 1 full day can the HOR be changed by the member.

8.  Army Regulation 635-5 (Separation Documents), in effect at the time, established the standardized policy for preparing and distributing the DD Form 214.  The DD Form 214 is prepared for all personnel at the time of their retirement, discharge, or release from active duty.  Item 7 of the DD Form 214 shows the EAD and HOR at time of entry.  Item 7b shows the street, city, state and ZIP code listed as the Soldier’s HOR.  The "HOR" is the place recorded as the HOR of the Soldier when commissioned, appointed, enlisted, or ordered to a tour of active duty.  This cannot be changed unless there is a break in service of at least 1 full day (Joint Federal Travel Regulations (JFTR), Volume 1, App A, Part I).  The HOR is not always the same as the legal domicile as defined for income tax purposes.  Legal domicile may change during a Soldier’s career.

9.  The JFTR provides that the HOR is the place recorded as the home of the individual at the time of enlistment or induction.  There is no authority to change the HOR as officially recorded at time of entry into the military service.  However, there is authority to correct a HOR if erroneously entered on the records at that time, and then only for travel and transportation purposes.  Correction of the HOR must be based on evidence that a bona fide error was made and the HOR as corrected must have been the actual home of the individual at the time of entry into the relevant period of service.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant contends that his last DD Form 214 should be corrected to show his EAD and HOR as being in Texas.

2.  The available evidence clearly shows that the applicant was at Fort Rucker, Alabama when he was appointed as a warrant officer and concurrently ordered to active duty as such.  Accordingly, when he retired in 2008, his DD Form 214 should have shown Fort Rucker as his EAD.  However, it incorrectly shows Puerto Rico.  Because he is asking to change his EAD to Texas, which is also incorrect, no change should be made to this entry unless he decides at a later time to have it changed to Fort Rucker, Alabama.
3.  The available evidence shows that upon his appointment as a warrant officer and order to active duty, his HOR of Puerto Rico was retained.  His last DD Form 214 correctly shows his HOR as Puerto Rico.

4.  The applicant's argument that all of the documents concerning his discharge as enlisted and appointment as a warrant officer originated in Texas is incorrect.  His discharge from an enlisted status was processed at Fort Rucker, Alabama, which is where his last enlisted DD Form 214 was issued.  Furthermore, he was appointed as a warrant officer while at Fort Rucker, Alabama, as evidenced by his appointment orders.  The fact that he may have been sent to Fort Rucker in a TDY status has no effect on where he was discharged and appointed.

5.  The HOR is the place recorded as the home of the individual at the time of enlistment or induction, appointment, or EAD.  There is no authority to change the HOR officially recorded at the time of entry into military service unless it is based on evidence that a bona fide error was made.

6.  There is no evidence of error or injustice in this case.

7.  In view of the above, the applicant's request should be denied.

BOARD VOTE:

________  ________  ________  GRANT FULL RELIEF 

________  ________  ________  GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF 

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

___x____  ___x____  ___x____  DENY APPLICATION

BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION:

The evidence presented does not demonstrate the existence of a probable error or injustice.  Therefore, the Board determined that the overall merits of this case 


are insufficient as a basis to amend the decision of the ABCMR set forth in Docket Number AR20130002263, dated 13 September 2013.




      __________x_________________
               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)                                         AR20140016251





3


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20140016251



2


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1