PROCEEDINGS

	IN THE CASE OF:   

	BOARD DATE:  13 July 2000
	DOCKET NUMBER:  AR1999031024

	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	
	Mr. Paul A. Petty .		Analyst	

The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Ms. Jennifer L. Prater		Chairperson	
	Mr. Melvin H. Meyer		Member	
	Mr. James E. Anderholm		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 that his enlistment extension be enforced or, in effect, that he be qualified for retirement at age 60 with 20 qualifying years of retirement points.

3.  The applicant states that in July 1996, he attended 11B10 MOSQ (Military Occupational Specialty Qualification course) so that he could stay in his unit when it changed from a signal unit to an infantry unit and earn his non-regular retirement.  He went to the normal December (1996) drill.  When he called the unit in January 1997 about a transfer to different unit, he was informed that he was being discharged on his Expiration of Term of Service (ETS) date.  He had over 19 years in the service when he was discharged.  He thought that maybe he was being discharged on an “Early Out” type discharge, but when he received his orders, he found that it was a regular ETS discharge with an effective date of 
1 January 1997.  This was confusing since his correct ETS of 19 January 1997 had been extended by a three year enlistment extension to 19 January 2000.  He started working with a recruiter, after he received the discharge order, to get back in.  He hoped to be reinstated in the New York Army National Guard so that he could finish earning his non-regular retirement.  The applicant provides a copy of his retirement points statement, discharge orders, and enlistment extension form.

4.  The applicant’s military records show that he enlisted in the Regular Army on 20 January 1969 for a 2 year term of service.  He was honorably discharged upon ETS on 20 March 1971 as an E-4.  Between 21 March 1971 to 19 January 1975, the applicant served in the Army Reserve.  He had a break in service from 20 January 1975 to 20 January 1980.  He enlisted in the New York Army National Guard on 21 January 1980 as an E-4 in Company A, 101st Signal Battalion, Brooklyn, New York.  From 8 January 1986 to 1 September 1986, the applicant was in the inactive Army National Guard with attachment to Company A, 101st Signal Battalion, and then resumed his active service in the same unit.  On 1 September 1994, he transferred to Detachment 9, 101st Signal Battalion in Freeport, New York.  The applicant attended an 11B10 qualification course from 13 to 26 July 1996 and completed the course standards.  On 1 September 1996, the applicant was transferred to Company C, 1st Battalion, 69th Infantry (Mechanized), in Freeport, New York, as an 11B10, infantryman when the signal unit was converted to an infantry unit.  On 17 November 1996, the applicant’s term of enlistment was extended for 3 years with a new ETS of 19 January 2000 as authorized by the commander of Company C on a DA Form 4836, Oath of Extension of Enlistment or Reenlistment.  However, for an unknown reason, the applicant’s extension was not put into effect and he was discharged by reason of ETS on 20 January 1997 as an E-4.

5.  The Office of the Adjutant General, State of New York, issued two different orders discharging the applicant: order 113-110, issued on 23 April 1997, with 
discharge effective on 20 January 1997; and order 123-002, issued on 3 May 1997, with discharge effective on 1 January 1997.  There is no record of rescinding either order.  His Report of Separation and Record of Service issued by the New York Army National Guard shows that the applicant was enlisted on 21 January 1980 and separated on 20 January 1997 with 17 years net service for the period.  He also served in the active Army from 20 January 1969 to 20 March 1971, a period of 2 years, 2 months, and 1 day.

6.  The applicant’s retirement points statement shows 18 years service qualifying him for retirement at age 60 and 19 years, 4 month, and 21 days creditable service for retired pay.  During the period 20 January 1971 to 20 March 1971, the applicant was extended on active duty beyond his regular ETS and earned 
60 retirement points but the period was not counted as a good year toward retirement.  During the period 21 March 1974 to 19 January 1975, the applicant earned 62 points but it was not counted as a good year toward retirement.

CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant was discharged erroneously instead of being continued in active Army Guard service according to his properly executed oath of extension of enlistment.  There is no indication of any misconduct on the applicant’s part causing the ETS discharge.  Had the enlistment extension been placed into effect, the applicant would have been provided opportunity to complete his 
20 years of service to qualify for retirement at age 60.  Failure to put the extension into effect and to discharge the applicant so close to his retirement eligibility is unjust and erroneous.  The applicant’s retirement points should be corrected to add 2 years to his current 18 years qualifying service to give him 
20 qualifying years for retirement at age 60.

2.  The period of active service from 20 January 1971 to 20 March 1971 with its 60 retirement points should be changed to code 49 to indicate a transition period from active duty to reserve duty and shown as 1 year creditable service for retired pay.

3.  The period of service 21 March 1974 to 19 January 1975 should be changed to 21 March 1974 to 20 March 1975 with this period showing 15 membership points, total 64 points, and 1 year creditable service for retired pay.

4.  The applicant should be provided his 20 year letter of authorization for retirement at age 60, counseled on electing a Survivor Benefit Plan (SBP), and given the opportunity to make his SBP election.

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

1.  That all of the Department of the Army records related to this case be corrected for the individual concerned as an exception by:

	a.  coding the period 20 January 1971 to 20 March 1971 as code 49 as a transition period with its 60 retirement points and show it as 1 year creditable service for retired pay; 

b.  changing the period of service 21 March 1974 to 19 January 1975 to show 21 March 1974 to 20 March 1975 with 15 membership points, a total 64 points, and 1 year creditable service for retired pay; 

	c.  showing that he has 20 qualifying years for retirement at age 60; 

	d.  placing him in the retired reserve effective 21 January 1997 and providing him all the benefits of the retired reserve;

e.  providing him a 20 year letter of authorization for retirement at age 60; and

f.  counseling him on the Survivor Benefit Plan (SBP) and provide him the opportunity to make his SBP election.

2.  That so much of the application as is in excess of the foregoing be denied.

BOARD VOTE:  

__jp____  ___mm__  ___ja__  GRANT AS STATED IN RECOMMENDATION

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

________  ________  ________  DENY APPLICATION

		___Jennifer L. Prater___
		        CHAIRPERSON

INDEX

CASE ID	AR1999031024	
SUFFIX		
RECON		
DATE BOARDED	20000713	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE		
DATE OF DISCHARGE		
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY		
DISCHARGE REASON		
BOARD DECISION	GRANT	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.136	Retirement	
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.