MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:  

	BOARD DATE:  28 February 2002
	DOCKET NUMBER:  AR2001063821

	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. Joyce A. Wright		Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Mr. Raymond V. O’Connor, Jr.		Chairperson	
	Mr. John T. Meixell		Member	
	Ms. Celia L. Adolphi		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 his DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) be corrected to show that he completed an additional 41 days of active duty in order to receive Veterans (VA) benefits.

APPLICANT STATES:  In effect, that he was separated under the early release program and was not counseled by his command regarding his VA benefits.  He attempted to use his VA benefits in order to purchase a home loan and was informed that he was not eligible because he did not complete the required time necessary.  His DD Form 214 shows that he was short 41 days of completing the required time necessary.  He was unaware of the ramifications of his actions, by
accepting an early release, which made him ineligible to receive VA benefits.  He also states that had he known that he would lose his VA benefits, he would have not accepted the early release.  He continued to pursue his military career in the USAR and is aware that his Reserve time cannot be combined with his active duty time to attain the required time for eligibility of VA benefits.  He respectfully requests that the Board consider his Reserve time in evaluating his records and that he be granted the additional 41 days of service in order to obtain VA benefits.  He also states that he has served additional time in the USAR.  In support of his application, he submits a copy of his DD Form 214 and a copy of a letter from the Department of Veterans Affairs (DVA). 

EVIDENCE OF RECORD:  The applicant's military records show he enlisted on 22 January 1991.  

The facts and circumstances pertaining to the applicant’s release from active duty are not present in the available records.  However, his DD Form 214 shows that on 11 December 1992, he was released from active duty under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 16-5, locally imposed bar to reenlistment.  He was furnished an Honorable Discharge Certificate.  He had a total of 1 year, 10 months, and 20 days of creditable service.  He was transferred to the USAR Control Group (Annual Training).

The applicant was honorably discharged from the USAR on 8 June 1999.

The applicant provided a copy of a letter from the DVA, dated 13 July 2001, which stated that the applicant’s request for a Certificate of Eligibility for Loan Guaranty Benefits was disallowed because he served less than the required number of days of active duty.

Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel.  Chapter 16 covers discharges caused by changes in service obligation.  Paragraph 16-5(b) applies to personnel who were denied reenlistment and provided that, if they received a locally imposed bar to reenlistment, and were unable to overcome the bar, they may apply for
immediate separation.
Under VA regulations, veterans with enlisted service after 7 September 1980, or who entered on active duty after 16 October 1981, must have served at least 
24 months to be eligible to qualify for the Home Mortgage Insurance Program. 

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.  The evidence of record shows that the applicant was honorably released from active duty under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 16-5, locally imposed bar to reenlist.  He completed 1 year, 10 months, and 20 days of creditable service and was 41 days short of completing 24 months of required service in order to obtain certain VA benefits.  

2.  The Board notes his contention that he was not counseled by his command regarding his VA benefits; however, there is no evidence in the available records, and the applicant has provided no evidence, to support his contention.  The Board also notes that the facts and circumstances pertaining to the applicant’s release from active duty are not present in the available records.

3.  While the Board is empathetic, it does not award time in service for the purpose of obtaining eligibility for benefits.  Therefore, he is not entitled to correction of his DD Form 214 to show an additional 41 days of service in order to obtain VA benefits.

4.  In the absence of evidence to the contrary, it must be presumed that the applicant’s administrative separation was accomplished in compliance with applicable regulations with no procedural errors, which would tend to jeopardize his rights.

5.  The type of separation directed and the reasons for that separation were 
appropriate considering all of the available facts of the case.

6.  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.

7.  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

__ro___  ___jm___  __ca____  DENY APPLICATION

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

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2001063821	
SUFFIX		
RECON		
DATE BOARDED	20020228	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE	HD	
DATE OF DISCHARGE	19921211	
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY	AR 635-200, C 16	
DISCHARGE REASON		
BOARD DECISION	DENY	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.  303		
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.