PROCEEDINGS

	IN THE CASE OF:        

	BOARD DATE:            1 August 2000
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR1999031021

	I certify that hereinafter is recorded the true and complete record of the proceedings of the Army Board for Correction of Military Records in the case of the above-named individual.  

	Mr. Carl W. S. Chun		Director	
	MS. Deborah L. Brantley		Senior Analyst	

The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Ms. Deborah S. Jacobs		Chairperson	
	Ms. Karol A. Kennedy		Member	
	Mr. Ernest W. Lutz, Jr.		Member	

	The applicant and counsel if any, did not appear before the Board.

	The Board considered the following evidence:

	Exhibit A - Application for correction of military 
            records
	Exhibit B - Military Personnel Records (including
	            advisory opinion, if any)

FINDINGS:

1.  The applicant has exhausted or the Board has waived the requirement for exhaustion of all administrative remedies afforded by existing law or regulations.

2.  The applicant requests, in effect, that his records be corrected to reflect that he was retired under the Army’s Early Retirement Program. 

3.  The applicant states he applied for the Fiscal Year (FY) 94 Early Retirement Program in November 1993 but his application “packet was returned to [him] with a rejection note attached.”  He notes that an Inspector General (IG) concluded that “the soldier at [his] headquarters that is in charge of personnel actions went on leave for thirty days and no one picked up the slack.”  The applicant states, in effect, that he remained on active duty until his scheduled separation date in June 1996 and did not reenlist.  He did however, enlist in the U.S. Army Reserve (USAR) with the expectation that he would be able to serve three years in the USAR and then retire with 20 years of military service.  He notes, however, that when he contacted USAR officials regarding his 20 year retirement he “got laughed at” and was told they had no “record of [him] in the system.”  In support of his request he submits copies of his early retirement application and USAR enlistment documents.

4.  Records available to the Board indicate that the applicant entered active duty on 18 April 1979.  On 21 June 1990 he reenlisted for a period of 6 years which established his separation date as 20 June 1996.  He was promoted to pay grade E-6 in September 1990 and in April 1992 was assigned to the 17th Combat Equipment Company in Belgium as a motor sergeant (specialty 63B).

5.  In August 1993 Department of the Army announced policies and guidance for the implementation of the FY94 Early Retirement Program.  The program, one of several temporary management tools utilized by the Army to reshape the Army, provided for the early retirement of soldiers serving in pay grade E-6 with at least 18 years of active service as of 31 August 1994 and holding a primary specialty of 63B.  On 7 October 1993 the 18 year requirement was reduced to 15 years for soldiers in specialty 63B.

6.  The applicant submitted an application to participate in the FY94 Early Retirement Program on 2 November 1993.  On 2 November 1993 the applicant’s servicing personnel office completed an endorsement forwarding the applicant’s request to the next higher headquarters.  The records contain no documents regarding the final disposition of the applicant’s request.

7.  The applicant remained overseas until June 1996 when he returned to the United State for separation processing.  He was honorably discharged on 
18 June 1996 with 17 years, 2 months, and 18 days of continuous active Federal service.  His records confirm that he enlisted in the USAR on 18 June 1996 for a period of 3 years and was assigned to the USAR Control Group (Reinforcement), although his enlistment contract indicated he was to “commence training with a troop program unit immediately.”

8.  The FY94 Early Retirement Program provided that individuals who were approved for early retirement were required to depart active duty no later than 
31 August 1994, but not earlier than the date they would attain 15 years of active service.  The applicant attained 15 years of service on 17 April 1994.  It also noted that an individual was not considered eligible for early retirement, and early retirement would not be approved, until such time as the Commander, U.S. Total Army Personnel Command (PERSCOM) determined that approval was consistent with manpower and budgetary limitations.  Manpower limitations included strength targets based on years of service, grade and specialty, or achievement of a target for early retirement.  Telephonic information received by a member of the Board’s staff from an official at the PERSCOM indicated that the target for early retirement of individuals in specialty 63B was never reached during the FY94 Early Retirement Program.  That individual noted that had the applicant’s application reached PERSCOM it would have been approved.

9.  Early Retirement Programs were announced by Department of the Army in FY95 and FY96, although the applicant did not meet any of the eligibility categories during those two years.

10.  Personnel approved for early retirement received the same benefits as individuals with 20 or more years of service, except their retirement pay was reduced.  Individuals retired under this program received a Separation Program Designator (SPD) Code of RBE, a Reenlistment Eligibility (RE) Code of 4R and their DD Forms 214 (Certificate or Release or Discharge from Active Duty) reflected a narrative reason for separation of “Voluntary Early Retirement.”

CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The evidence confirms the applicant was eligible and did apply for early retirement under the FY94 Early Retirement Program.  While there is no indication why the applicant’s application was returned it is evident, based on the comment from the official at PERSCOM, that had the applicant’s request reached Department of the Army it would have been approved as the early retirement target for individuals in specialty 63B was never reached during the FY94 program.

2.  Because the applicant’s FY94 early retirement request was never approved he continued to serve on active duty until completion of his 1990 six year enlistment contract.  It is unclear why the applicant would have elected to be discharged with 17 years of active service but his immediate enlistment in the USAR tends to support the applicant’s contention that he believed he would be able to attain a 20 year retirement merely by serving the additional 3 years of service in the USAR.

3.  Based on the evidence available it appears that the applicant’s inability to secure early retirement under the FY94 program was the result of an error in processing or at the very least creates the appearance of an injustice.  As such the Board concludes that it would be in the interest of justice to grant the applicant an early retirement, as an exception to policy, effective 18 June 1996 in view of the fact that he continued to service on active duty until that date.

4.  In view of the foregoing, the applicant’s records should be corrected as recommended below.

RECOMMENDATION:

That all of the Department of the Army records related to this case be corrected:

a.  by showing that the action separating the individual concerned from active duty on 18 June 1996 is void and of no force or effect; and

b.  by showing that on 18 June 1996 he was released from active duty under the provisions of the Early Retirement Program; and

c.  by transferring him to the U. S. Army Reserve Control Group (Retired) effective 19 June 1996.

BOARD VOTE:  

__kak ___  ____dj __  ___ewl__  GRANT AS STATED IN RECOMMENDATION

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

________  ________  ________  DENY APPLICATION

		______D. S. Jacobs______
		        CHAIRPERSON

INDEX

CASE ID	AR1999031021	
SUFFIX		
RECON		
DATE BOARDED	2000/08/01	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE		
DATE OF DISCHARGE		
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY		
DISCHARGE REASON		
BOARD DECISION	GRANT	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.  338	136.0000/retirement	
2.  343	136.0500/early retire program	
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.