MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:       

	BOARD DATE:            10 October 2001
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR2001057772

	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. Jessie B. Strickland		Analyst	

The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Mr. Luther L. Santiful		Chairperson	
	Mr. Charles Gainor		Member	
	Mr. Joe R Schroeder		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:  That her report of separation (DD Form 214) be corrected to reflect that she did contribute to the Post-Vietnam Era Veteran’s Educational Assistance Program (VEAP).

APPLICANT STATES:  In effect, that she converted her VEAP to the Montgomery GI Bill (MGIB) upon her retirement and that she paid all of the premiums necessary to do so.  In support of her application she submits copies of the checks she paid, a copy of the cash collection voucher she received in return, and copies of the documents submitted to complete the conversion.  She also states that she was informed that the paperwork would be forwarded to the appropriate agency to correct her DD Form 214; however, to date it has not been accomplished.

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

She enlisted on 3 March 1981 for training as a veterinary food inspection specialist.  She remained on active duty through a series of continuous reenlistments and was promoted to the pay grade of E-6 on 1 August 1992.

On 20 March 2001 she submitted a MGIB enrollment application (DD Form 2366) to convert her VEAP to the MGIB.  The application was authenticated on the same date.  She paid a premium of $2,700.00 to the Defense Military Pay Office at Fort Sam Houston, Texas and received a cash collection voucher for enrollment in the MGIB on 26 March 2001.

On 27 March 2001 she submitted an Application for Refund of Educational Contributions under the VEAP for the purpose of converting to the MGIB.

The applicant was honorably released from active duty on 31 March 2001 and was transferred to the Retired List effective 1 April 2001.  She had served 20 years and 28 days of total active service and her DD Form 214 indicates “NO” in item 15a (Member contributed to Post-Vietnam Era VEAP).

In the processing of this case a staff member of the Board contacted education officials at the Total Army Personnel Command (PERSCOM) to ascertain how individuals provide proof of their conversion from the VEAP to the MGIB, in the absence of information on the DD Form 214 to indicate such entitlements.  Officials at the PERSCOM informed the staff member of the Board that individuals were informed at the time of the conversion that they were to keep a copy of the DD Form 2366 to present to Department of Veterans Administration (DVA) officials as proof of enrollment.

Army Regulation 635-5 provides instructions for the preparation of the DD Form 214.  It provides, in pertinent part, that if a soldier contributed to VEAP and did not get money back, a “YES” entry will be made.  For those who enlisted before 1984, contributed to VEAP and received their money back, mark a “NO” entry.  For any soldier who enlisted after 1985, mark “NO”.

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.  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.

2.  The applicant cashed in her entitlement to VEAP benefits and converted to the MGIB.  Accordingly, her DD Form 214 was properly prepared to reflect a “NO” entry at the time of her separation.

3.  In order for the applicant to receive her benefits under the MGIB, she simply has to submit the same documents she has submitted to this Board, to DVA officials to establish her entitlements to benefits under that program.

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

__jrs ____  ____cg__  ___ls ___  DENY APPLICATION

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

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2001057772	
SUFFIX		
RECON	YYYYMMDD	
DATE BOARDED	2001/10/10	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE		
DATE OF DISCHARGE		
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY		
DISCHARGE REASON		
BOARD DECISION	DENY	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.  189	110.0000/CORR 214	
2.  1018	103.0100/ED BENEFITS	
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.