PROCEEDINGS

	IN THE CASE OF:  

	BOARD DATE:           4 August 1999                   
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR1998005607

	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. Loren G. Harrell		Director	
	Mrs. Nancy Amos		Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Mr. Fred K. McCoy		Chairperson	
	Ms. Irene N. Wheelwright		Member	
	Mr. George D. Paxson		Member	

	The applicant and counsel if any, did not appear before the Board.

	The Board considered the following evidence:

	Exhibit A - Application for correction of military 
                records
	Exhibit B - Military Personnel Records (including
	            advisory opinion, if any)

FINDINGS:

1.  The applicant has exhausted or the Board has waived the requirement for exhaustion of all administrative remedies afforded by existing law or regulations.

2.  The applicant requests that his extension be voided.

3.  The applicant states that he extended to receive entitlement for the Montgomery GI Bill.  The extension was in violation of the 3-year limit.  He was not counseled that the extension might preclude his eligibility for other incentives.

4.  The applicant’s military records show that he entered the Selected Reserve after having being released from active duty with the Regular Army on 5 July 1995.

5.  On 18 August 1996, the applicant extended his enlistment as a member of a Troop Program Unit of the U. S. Army Reserve for a period of 3 years and 6 months so he could qualify for entitlement under the Montgomery GI Bill.

6.  On 19 August 1998, the applicant was counseled that his extension was in violation of the regulation and that it might preclude his eligibility for other incentives.

7.  Army Regulation 140-111 prescribes policies, responsibilities and procedures for the U. S. Army Reserve Reenlistment Program.  Table 3-1, Rule R states that a soldier who has more than 3 but less than 6 years remaining on his current enlistment agreement and desires entitlement under the Montgomery GI Bill will be extended for the period necessary to provide for a remaining term of service of 6 years.  However, the extension may not exceed 3 years.

8.  In the processing of this case, an advisory opinion was obtained from the Office of the Chief, Army Reserve (OCAR) (SEE ATTACHED).  OCAR opined that the DA Form 4836, Oath of Extension of Enlistment or Reenlistment executed on 18 August 1996 is in violation of Army Regulation 140-111 because it exceeds the 3-year limit.  OCAR further opined that the DA Form 4836 should be voided and the applicant allowed to reenlist for the desired number of years in accordance with Table 2-3 of Army Regulation 140-111 provided he is otherwise qualified for continued U. S. Army Reserve membership.  Such reenlistment would entitle him to certain incentives.

9.  A copy of the advisory opinion was provided to the applicant.  He did not respond within the given time frame.

CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The Board concludes that a Government error occurred in this case.

2.  The applicant’s extension violated the regulation limiting such extension to a 3-year period.  Had he been properly counseled, he would have been advised that a reenlistment, vice an extension, would have entitled him to certain incentives in addition to the Montgomery GI Bill.

3.  In view of the foregoing, it would be in the interest of justice to correct the applicant’s records as recommended below.

RECOMMENDATION:

That all of the Department of the Army records related to this case be corrected by:

     a. voiding the applicant’s DA Form 4836 dated 18 August 1996;

     b.  allowing the applicant to reenlist effective 18 August 1996 or at any time prior to his reserve obligation termination date for the desired number of years in accordance with Table 2-3, Army Regulation 140-111 provided he is otherwise qualified for continued U. S. Army Reserve membership; and

     c.  entitling the applicant to the incentives outlined in Army Regulation 135-7, Incentive Program and as noted in the advisory opinion if he so reenlists.

BOARD VOTE:  

__fkm___  __inw___  __gdp___  GRANT AS STATED IN RECOMMENDATION

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

________  ________  ________  DENY APPLICATION

			Fred K. McCoy
		______________________
		        CHAIRPERSON

INDEX

CASE ID	AR1998005607	
SUFFIX		
RECON		
DATE BOARDED	19990804	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE		
DATE OF DISCHARGE		
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY		
DISCHARGE REASON		
BOARD DECISION	(GRANT)	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.	112.06	
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.