MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:     

	BOARD DATE:           25 June 2002                  
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR2002067832

	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	
	Ms. Stephanie Thompkins		Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Mr. John N. Slone		Chairperson	
	Mr. Elzey J. Arledge, Jr. 		Member	
	Mr. Thomas Lanyl		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:  Credit for his Reserve time from 1969 to 1989.

APPLICANT STATES:  That he is being denied retired pay at age 60.  He received his 20-year letter and misplaced his copy.  He also states that St. Louis claims that they do not have any record of his 20-year letter.

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

He reenlisted in the Regular Army, in pay grade E-4, on 8 April 1965, with prior service.  He was honorably separated on 8 April 1968 and transferred to the USAR Control Group (Reinforcement).

He was advanced to staff sergeant, pay grade E-6, on 1 October 1979.

On 23 November 1987, 25 February, and 10 April 1988, Letters of Instructions—Unexcused Absences, notified him of his unexcused absences.

On 26 May 1988, his commander recommended that the applicant be considered for separation by reason of Unsatisfactory Participation.

On 15 June 1988, he was reassigned to the USAR Control Group for Unsatisfactory Participation.

He was honorably discharged from the USAR on 11 January 1989.

His Chronological Record of Military Service, dated 8 February 2002, shows 11 years, 11 months and 28 days of qualifying years for retirement purposes and 19 years, 11 months and 9 days total service for longevity pay purposes.

His records do not show he was issued a letter of notification of eligibility for retired pay at age 60.

He attained age 60 on 2 February 2002.

Army Regulation 135-180 prescribes the policy and procedures for granting retired pay benefits at age 60, under Title 10, United States Code, chapter 67, sections 1331 to 1337.  This regulation specifies, in part, that to be eligible for retired pay an individual must have attained age 60, and completed a minimum of 20 years of qualifying service; and that subsequent to 1 July 1949, qualifying service is granted only for each year of service an individual earns 50 or more retirement points.

The regulation also specifies that the term "good years" is an unofficial term used to mean years in which 50 or more retirement points are earned during each year, and which count as qualifying years of service for retirement benefits at age 60.

On 8 February 2002, the Supervisor, Retirements and Annuities, Army Reserve Personnel Command, expressed the opinion that the applicant's official military personnel file (OMPF) was reviewed and the Chronological Record of Military Service was annotated with all service time documented in the OMPF.  That time indicates the service mentioned by the applicant in his petition to the Board.  The record shows that the applicant had 19 years, 11 months and 9 days of total service (longevity), and 11 years, 11 months and 28 days of qualifying service toward retirement.  Based on these facts, the applicant is not entitled to retirement.

The opinion was forwarded to the applicant for rebuttal on 15 March 2002.  He did not respond.

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

1.  In view of the circumstances in this case, the applicant is not entitled to correction to his Reserve time for retirement.  He has not shown error, injustice, or inequity for the relief he now requests.

2.  The Board has noted his contentions; however, based on his Chronological Record of Military Service that shows he has 11 years, 11 months and 28 days of qualifying service for retired pay, he is not entitled to retirement pay at age 60.  He did not qualify with less than the required 20 years of qualifying (good) years.

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

_jns____  _eja_______  _tl_____ DENY APPLICATION

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

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2002067832	
SUFFIX		
RECON		
DATE BOARDED	20020625	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE		
DATE OF DISCHARGE		
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY		
DISCHARGE REASON		
BOARD DECISION	DENY	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.	135.00	
2.	136.04	
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.