MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

		IN THE CASE OF:    

		BOARD DATE:          9 October 2003                    
		DOCKET NUMBER:  AR2003085863

	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. Edmund P. Mercanti		Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Mr. Raymond V. O'Connor, Jr.		Chairperson	
	Mr. Robert J. Osborn, II		Member	
	Ms. Eloise C. Prendergast		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 her records be corrected to validate her 21 June 1999 reenlistment in the US Army Reserve (USAR) Control Group (Individual Mobilization Augmentee).  She also requests orders be published to assign her from the USAR Control Group (Reinforcement) to a troop program unit.

APPLICANT STATES:  That since she had a current physical examination, taken on 14 June 1995, she was fully eligible to reenlist on 21 June 1999.  She was given the oath of reenlistment, taken to her unit and introduced to the members of that unit.  However, she never received orders assigning her to that unit.  Her recruiter told her to be patient, that orders would be forthcoming.  However, those orders never materialized.  

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

She enlisted in the Regular Army for 3 years in pay grade E-1 on 16 October 1961.  She was honorably released from active duty on 25 February 1964.

She had a break in service until her enlistment in the USAR for 1 year in pay grade E-4 on 9 November 1973.  She was honorably discharged on 26 November 1974.

On 13 March 1976, she reenlisted in the USAR with a break in service.  She reenlisted for 1 year in pay grade E-4.

On 13 March 1977, she immediately reenlisted for 1 year.

On 13 March 1978, she extended her 13 March 1977 reenlistment for 2 years.

On 12 March 1980, she was honorably discharged in pay grade E-5.

On 20 November 1980, she reenlisted in the USAR with a break in service.  She reenlisted for 1 year in pay grade E-5.

On 27 October 1981, she reenlisted for 3 years.

On 15 October 1983, she enlisted in the Army National Guard (ARNG) for 3 years in pay grade E-5.

On 12 October 1984, she was discharged from the ARNG and assigned to the USAR Control Group.

On 14 October 1986, she enlisted in the USAR for 6 years in pay grade E-5.

On 10 December 1992, she extended her 14 October 1986 reenlistment for one year (this extension was executed after the expiration of her term of service [ETS]).

On 1 May 1992, she was promoted to pay grade E-6.

On 14 October 1993, she reenlisted for 6 years in pay grade E-6.  This reenlistment contract was signed on 21 April 1994, and was antedated with the approval of the Commanding General, Army Reserve Personnel Command.

On 21 June 1999, the applicant extended her 14 October 1993 reenlistment for 1 year.

On 23 June 1999, orders were published assigning the applicant from the USAR Control Group to a troop program unit.  The applicant was serving in pay grade E-7 at that time.

On 9 July 1999, the orders assigning the applicant from the USAR Control Group to a troop program unit were revoked.

On 14 November 2000, the applicant was honorably discharged.

The (then) Army Reserve Personnel Command (AR-PERSCOM) Soldier Management System (SMS) for the applicant (a computerized summary of the actions which are taken on a soldier) shows that on 18 June 1999, the applicant was told she was ineligible to reenlist or extend her enlistment because she could not complete 20 qualifying years of service before she turned age 60.  

On 8 July 1999, the AR-PERSCOM sent the applicant a certified letter informing her that her extension was erroneous and had been revoked because she was unable to earn 20 qualifying years of service before she turned age 60.  She had 13 qualifying years of service and was age 55.  This letter was returned as undeliverable due to the forwarding order having expired.

On 3 May 2000, the applicant’s promotion to pay grade E-7 was revoked since she was in a non-promotable status when she was promoted.

Army Regulation 140-111, U.S. Army Reserve Reenlistment Program, Table 2-1, Rule A, Age, states that a Reservist unable to complete 20 years of qualifying service for retired pay is disqualified for reenlistment.  Table 4-2 of this regulation, Nonwaivable moral and administrative disqualifications, Rule F, is “Unable to complete 20 qualifying years of service for retired pay by age 60.”

Army Regulation 135-178, paragraph 11-1c, states that when, through administrative error a soldier is not discharged on the actual date of completion of term of enlistment, reenlistment, or date of completion of statutorily obligated service, the soldier will be retained beyond his or her normal discharge date for the convenience of the Government.

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

1.  The applicant was not qualified to execute a reenlistment or extension contract prior to the 13 October 2000 expiration of her term of service (ETS) because she could not earn 20 qualifying years of service prior to reaching age 60.

2.  As such, she was properly discharged.  While she should have been discharged on 13 October 1999 because her extension was revoked, she was discharged on the earliest date her discharge could be effected after her status had been resolved.  She was retained beyond her normal discharge date for the convenience of the Government.

3.  Because the applicant could not earn 20 qualifying years of service prior to reaching age 60, her assignment order to the troop program unit was also revoked.  She was in the process of being discharged.  There is no error or injustice in that revocation.

4.  It would appear that the applicant has mistaken her 21 June 1999 1-year extension of her 14 October 1993 reenlistment with a multiple year reenlistment.  The date she says she reenlisted is the same date of her extension.  

5.  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

___ecp___  ___rvo __  ____rjo _  DENY APPLICATION

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

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2003085863	
SUFFIX		
RECON	YYYYMMDD	
DATE BOARDED	20031009	
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.		
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.