MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:   

	BOARD DATE:            10 November 1998
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AC98-10306

	I certify that hereinafter is recorded the record of consideration of the Army Board for Correction of Military Records in the case of the above-named individual.

	Mr. Loren G. Harrell		Director	
	Mr. W. E. Schnupp		Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Mr. Calvin M. Fowler		Chairperson	
	Ms. Irene E. Wheelwright		Member	
	Ms. Margaret K. Patterson		Member	

	The Board, established pursuant to authority contained in 10 U.S.C. 1552, convened at the call of the Chairperson on the above date.  In accordance with Army Regulation 15-185, the application and the available military records pertinent to the corrective action requested were reviewed to determine whether to authorize a formal hearing, recommend that the records be corrected without a formal hearing, or to deny the application without a formal hearing if it is determined that insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate the existence of probable material error or injustice.

	The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein.

	The Board considered the following evidence:

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

APPLICANT REQUESTS:  The applicant requests that he be given credit for his participation in the Simultaneous Membership Program (SMP) in a USAR unit and the Reserve Officer Training Corps (ROTC) advanced course.

APPLICANT STATES:  That he was not granted service credit for the SMP/ROTC program as per the DOD Authorization Act of 1997.  He contends that his pay entry basic date (PEBD) should be recomputed for his Army/VA retirement pay.  In support of his request, he has provided a copy of his DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty, and a copy of his commissioning orders.

EVIDENCE OF RECORD:  The applicant's military records show:

He enlisted in the USAR on 22 June 1984 in pay grade E-3 for the alternate training program for training in military occupational training 76C.  He subsequently completed the ROTC Advance Course program and was commissioned a second lieutenant on 26 June 1986.  He entered active duty on 29 June 1986 and was retired for physical disability on 14 November 1988 in the grade of first lieutenant.

Officers who have separated or retired from active duty and believe that they are entitled to service credit for SMP are required to submit documentation to this Board for determination of their eligibility.

Public Law (PL) 104-201, Section 507,of the National Defense Authorization Act, dated 23 September 1996, amended the provisions of the law to provide service credit to officers commissioned from the ROTC Advanced Course program who also participated in the Simultaneous Membership Program (SMP), retroactive to 1 August 1979 when the SMP began.  The revisions will result in no increase in pay, retired or retainer pay before the date of enactment, 23 September 1996.  If the credit results in a higher basic pay due to a change in PEBD, the effective date of the increase will be 23 September 1996.  The SMP service credit affects only the PEBD for pay purposes.  It does not affect the Basic Active Service Date (BASD) or Basic Date of Appointment for officers or date of rank for officers.

DISCUSSION:  Considering all the evidence, allegations, and information presented by the applicant, together with the evidence of record, applicable law and regulations, it is concluded:

1.  While the applicant was commissioned from the ROTC Advanced Course program and had previously been an enlisted member of the USAR, there is no substantiating documentation in his records to show that he enlisted for or participated in the SMP.

2.  The documentation provided by the applicant does not establish that he participated in the SMP.
3.  In order to justify correction of a military record the applicant must show to the satisfaction of the Board, or it must otherwise satisfactorily appear, that the record is in error or unjust.  The applicant has failed to submit evidence that would satisfy this requirement.

4.  In view of the foregoing, there is no basis for granting the applicant's request.

DETERMINATION:  The applicant has failed to submit sufficient relevant evidence to demonstrate the existence of probable error or injustice.

BOARD VOTE:

________  ________  ________  GRANT

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

CMF____  _IEW____  _MKP___  DENY APPLICATION

                                                                 W. E. Schnupp

						Loren G. Harrell
						Director