on the principal claim would have restored plaintiff to the military. Because we conclude that the correction board’s decision should be upheld, the premise for the declaratory judgment claim no longer can be satisfied. Accordingly, that claim is moot. For the same reason, we have no occasion to transfer that claim to the district court. In sum, we conclude that defendant’s motion to dismiss the reinstatement and back pay claims for lack of jurisdiction should be denied and that plaintiff’s claim for declaratory relief should be dismissed as moot. Ill It is well-settled that determinations made by the boards for correction of military records are reviewable. A discharge decision made by a correction board may be vacated if it is arbitrary, capricious, unlawful or unsupported ir.) (<HOLDING>), cert. denied, 488 U.S. 941, 109 S.Ct. 365,
holding in the context of an arbitration award confirmation proceeding that the decision as to whether to allow additional discovery is an entirely practical one involving a balancing of the need for additional information with its effect on the arbitration process holding that an additional remedy does not constitute an additional requirement holding that the decision by the navy to deny additional special pay was nonjusticiable because courts do not have the institutional competence to make the substantive determination that a particular medical officer is deserving of additional compensation holding that it was within the trial courts discretion to refuse any additional discovery and that the courts refusal to allow additional discovery was not an abuse of discretion holding that in addition to the elements of the substantive violation a rico conspiracy requires proof of the additional element of an agreement