MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:   

	BOARD DATE:           19 September 2000                   
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR2000043092

	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	
	Mrs. Nancy Amos		Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Mr. Hubert O. Fry, Jr.		Chairperson	
	Mr. John P. Infante		Member	
	Ms. Regan K. Smith		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 he be determined to be entitled to veterans’ benefits.

APPLICANT STATES:  That the Army breached his contract and promised him he would have full benefits if he got out.  Now he finds out that he needs 180 days to get any benefits.  If the Army wanted to be fair they would credit him for the few days that he lacks to make 180 days.  He provides no supporting evidence.

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

He enlisted in the Regular Army on 31 May 1977 for training of choice in military occupational specialty (MOS) 16C (Hercules Fire Control Crewman) and station of choice at Fort Bliss, TX.  He had noted on his Statements for Enlistment that he had tried marijuana eight months previously.  

When the applicant was still in basic training, he was informed that he was disqualified for entry into the Nuclear Surety Personnel Reliability Program because of his prior use of marijuana.  Qualification for the Program was a requirement for training in MOS 16C.  Since the Army was aware of his marijuana use prior to his enlistment, his enlistment was erroneous.

On or about 5 August 1977, the Army assigned the applicant to Aberdeen Proving Grounds, MD apparently in an attempt to offer him alternative training in MOS 44B (Welder).  

On 18 August 1977, the applicant requested to be relieved from his commitment to the Army because his enlistment contract was violated.  On 14 September 1977, the U. S. Army Military Personnel Center approved his request.  There is no evidence to show the Army made any further promises to the applicant.

The applicant’s DD Form 214 is not available.  He was discharged on                 22 September 1977 after completing 3 months and 22 days of creditable active service.

The applicant is apparently requesting some type of veterans’ benefits for which the VA requires completion of 180 days of active duty.

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.  The Board regrets the applicant’s past problems with the Army; however, it is not within the jurisdiction of the Department of Defense to determine eligibility for veterans’ benefits.  The applicant’s request to “credit him for the few days that he lacks to make 180 days” would be fair enough if he only needed a few days to give him credit for 180 days.  Unfortunately, he is over 60 days short of 180 days and the Board does not find it equitable to grant that much relief.  The applicant may desire to apply to the Department of Veterans Affairs for an exception to policy.

2.  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

__hof___  __jpi___  __rks___  DENY APPLICATION

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

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2000043092	
SUFFIX		
RECON		
DATE BOARDED	20000919	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE		
DATE OF DISCHARGE		
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY		
DISCHARGE REASON		
BOARD DECISION	(DENY)	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.	100.00	
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.