MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:       

	BOARD DATE:            24 August 2000                  
	DOCKET NUMBER:    AR1999029000

	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. Carl W. S. Chun		Director	
	Mr. W. E. Schnupp		Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Mr. George D. Paxson		Chairperson	
	Mr. Curtis L. Greenway		Member	
	Mr. Allen L. Raub		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:  In effect, that his military record be corrected to reflect that he has sufficient creditable service for reserve retirement.

APPLICANT STATES:  That military record keeping is poor and has resulted in him not receiving the number of points necessary to retire.  He contends that no one ever informed him of the so called “good year” policy wherein you must earn 50 points a year, every year, to have it considered a good year for retirement purposes.  He says he found out about the “good years” policy in 1991 after he had served 18 years with the reserve component.  He claims that the Adjutants General (AG) of Ohio, California and Alaska have been particularly remiss in recording his service for retirement purposes.

In support of his request, he has submitted an extensive handwritten memorandum of his experiences and complaints with the Army National Guard (ARNG).  Additionally, his record contains numerous pieces of correspondence to elected representatives, government officials, State AG’s, lawyers and various news and television services setting forth a “statement of charges” against each state he believes wronged him.

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

He was born on 16 March 1935, and enlisted in the Regular Army on 14 April 1952.  He served in Korea and was awarded the Korean Service Medal with       2 Bronze Service Stars, the Combat Infantryman Badge, the United Nations Service Medal, the National Defense Service Medal and the Republic of Korea Presidential Unit Citation.  He was separated on 28 July 1954 with an undesirable discharge.  The Army Discharge Review Board subsequently upgraded the characterization of his discharge to a general discharge on            16 November 1954.

The records show that between1972 and 1993, he served in the West Virginia, California, Arizona, Ohio and Alaska ARNG and the USAR in West Virginia.

On 7 December 1986 a Chronological Statement of Retirement Points showing that he had a total of 30 creditable points for retirement for the years 1984 and 1985 was furnished to the applicant at his civilian address.

On 30 April 1992 he enlisted in the Alaska ARNG for 2 years, 11 months and      7 days and completed an Enlistment/Reenlistment Contract (DD Form 4) Annex acknowledging that he would be required to maintain satisfactory participation in the Ready Reserve for the entire period of service stipulated on the DD Form 4.

On 1 April 1993 he was discharged from the Alaska ARNG for unsatisfactory participation and issued a general discharge.  On 8 August 1994 the Alaska ARNG changed his discharge characterization to honorable.

The available records do not contain copies of his enlistment/separation documents for each of the other ARNG units with whom he served during his reserve career.

Records maintained by the US Army Reserve Personnel Command (AR-PERSCOM) show that the applicant is currently credited with 1380 points toward retirement equating to six years and three months of creditable service for reserve retirement purposes.

National Guard Regulation 680-2, provides in pertinent part, that a Statement of Retirement Points will be prepared for all soldiers regardless of the number of points awarded.  The statement tells the soldier whether he/she earned sufficient points to be credited for a qualifying period for retired pay or for retention in an active status.  The statement is prepared upon a soldier’s initial entry into a unit and a copy is furnished annually to give him the opportunity to request correction of errors.

Army Regulation 135-91, Service Obligations, Methods of fulfillment, Participation Requirements and Enforcement Procedures, provides in pertinent part, that satisfactory participation in troop program units requires attending all scheduled drills and attending and satisfactorily completing the entire period of annual training unless excused by proper authority.

Title 10, United States Code § 1331-1337 authorizes retired pay benefits for Reserve Component military service.  To be eligible for retired pay under this law a USAR or ARNG soldier must participate in annual training and monthly unit training assemblies to earn retirement points.  A minimum of 50 points must be earned each year to be counted as a good year for retirement and a minimum of 20 qualifying years of service is required to receive retired pay.

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.  Since 1949, well before the applicant’s initial enlistment in the ARNG, regulations have specified that 50 points a year constitutes a “good year” and 

20 good years are required in order to qualify for reserve retirement.  It is difficult to accept that the applicant was a member of the reserve component for 18 years before he learned of the retirement policy.

2.  Army regulations specify that a soldier will be apprised of the retirement point accounting system upon enlistment in his/her initial unit and be provided a Statement of Retirement Points annually to provide the soldier an opportunity to correction the record if necessary.  In the applicant’s case, he may or may not have received every annual statement.  However, the evidence of record shows that on at least one occasion the Chronological Statement of Retirement Points was sent to his civilian address which should at least have alerted him to the retirement program.  Further, when he enlisted in the Alaska ARNG he acknowledged the requirement to maintain satisfactory participation with his unit, a prerequisite for not only receiving pay but points toward retirement.

3.  The applicant alludes to the generally poor records keeping in the reserve components and the failure of several States to properly document his service, which resulted in his not qualifying for retirement.  Now he is 64 years old and unable to do anything to help himself to become eligible for retirement.  While he has provided voluminous personal statements and correspondence concerning the omissions and errors committed against him, he has provided no evidence to support his allegations. By his own admission he spent over 21 years in the ARNG and USAR.  If he did not learn of the “good years” policy until he had completed 18 years then at some point he must have become aware of the policy and a reasonable person, it seems, would have taken some action to determine their retirement status.  But he has provided no evidence other than his own statement to show that the retirement point calculations for him are wrong.

4.  If, in fact, he believes he is entitled to more retirement credit than that currently shown for him by AR-PERSCOM, he should gather supporting evidence such as leave and earning statements, orders to training, extension course completion documents, etc. and petition the AR-PERSCOM for a review of his case.  Based on the documentation submitted with his application and that reviewed in his record however, it does not appear likely that he will be able to establish an additional 14 years or qualifying service.

5.  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.

6.  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

___gdp__  ___clg  __  ___alr___  DENY APPLICATION

		    Carl W. S. Chun
		    Director, Army Board for Correction
    of Military Records

INDEX

CASE ID	AR1999029000	
SUFFIX		
RECON	YYYYMMDD	
DATE BOARDED	20000824	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE	(HD, GD, UOTHC, UD, BCD, DD, UNCHAR)	
DATE OF DISCHARGE	YYYYMMDD	
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY	AR .  .  .  .  .  	
DISCHARGE REASON		
BOARD DECISION	DENY	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.  113.01		
2.   136.03		
3.   		
4.		
5.		
6.