IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 14 July 2009 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20090000933 THE BOARD CONSIDERED THE FOLLOWING EVIDENCE: 1. Application for correction of military records (with supporting documents provided, if any). 2. Military Personnel Records and advisory opinions (if any). THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE: 1. The applicant requests, in effect, that his Mandatory Removal Date (MRD) for Maximum Age be corrected from 24 January 2002 (the day he turned age 60) to 24 January 2009. 2. The applicant states his Official Military Personnel File (OMPF) shows his MRD as 2002, but his U.S. Army Reserve (USAR) unit showed his MRD as 24 January 2009. The applicant states that he had applied for an MRD extension when he was assigned to a USAR unit which he left in April 2004 and speculates that the unit may have failed to forward his request. 3. The applicant provides correspondence between him and an elected member of Congress. He also submits his DA Form 2B (Personnel Qualification Record) which shows his MRD as 24 January 2009. CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE: 1. The applicant's military records show he was born on 24 January 1942. He enlisted in the Regular Army on 17 October 1961 and was honorably released from active duty on 7 October 1964. He was assigned to the USAR and had no performance until his discharge on 16 October 1967. 2. He had a break in service until his commission in the Army National Guard (ARNG) on 10 July 1980. 3. He entered active duty as a commissioned officer on 31 May 1987 and remained on active duty until 30 September 1993. He was honorably released from active duty on that date and transferred to a USAR unit. 4. A review of the integrated Personnel Electronic Records Management System (iPERMS) shows that on 19 February 2003 the applicant's unit administrator called the (now) Human Resources Command St. Louis (HRC-STL) concerning retaining the applicant beyond age 60. 5. On 19 February 2003, the United States Army Special Operations Command (USASOC) called the HRC-STL and stated that they noticed that the applicant should have been separated on his 60th birthday. It was noted that his MRD was listed as being in 2009. The HRC-STL stated that the USASOC can ask for an MRD extension and fax it to their location for review. 6. On 7 March 2003, the applicant was ordered to active duty in support of Operation Enduring Freedom with his USAR unit. He was honorably released from active duty on 16 March 2004. 7. On 17 February 2005, the applicant was promoted to the rank of colonel, Medical Corps. 8. Effective 1 August 2008, the applicant was transferred to the Retired Reserve due to completion of 20 or more years of qualifying service for retired pay at age 60. 9. Title 10, Section 14702(b) states that an officer may not be retained under this section after the last day of the month in which the officer becomes 60 years of age. 10. Title 10, Section 14703, Authority to retain chaplains and officers in medical specialties until specified age, states that the Secretary of the Army may, with the officer's consent, retain in an active status any Reserve officer assigned to the Medical Corps, but the officer cannot be retained beyond age 67. 11. A DA Form 2B is a locally-maintained form.  Unit personnel provide the entries and changes to this form. A Soldier's Official Military Personnel File (OMPF), which contains only those documents which have been verified in accordance with Army regulations, is located on iPERMS. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS: 1. The applicant's records show that his unit had realized that the applicant had reached his MRD and had made arrangements with the HRC-STL for the applicant to submit a request for waiver to remain in an active status. The applicant confirms this in his statement that he submitted a request for extension of his MRD. 2. Based on the fact that the applicant's unit was mobilized shortly after his unit administrator's discussion with HRC-STL about his MRD, it may be reasonably concluded that the applicant did in fact submit his request for a waiver and that request was either not forwarded by his (then) unit personnel or it was lost at a higher headquarters. The mobilization process for a USAR unit is labor and time intensive. 3. While the applicant should have started the waiver process before he reached age 60, and he should have followed up to insure his request for waiver was approved, he did not. However, he reasonably assumed that his waiver had been submitted and would have been informed if it had been disapproved. The fact that the applicant's DA Form 2B shows his MRD as 24 January 2009 adds weight to this conclusion. In addition, the Army effectively validated the applicant's service beyond his MRD by mobilizing and deploying him, by paying him, by letting him continue to attend unit training assemblies, and by promoting him. 4. As such, it would be equitable to now correct the applicant's records to show that he was granted a waiver to remain in an active status until age 67. BOARD VOTE: _____X___ ___X_____ ____X____ GRANT FULL RELIEF ________ ________ ________ GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF ________ ________ ________ GRANT FORMAL HEARING ________ ________ ________ DENY APPLICATION BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION: The Board determined that the evidence presented was sufficient to warrant a recommendation for relief. As a result, the Board recommends that all Department of the Army records of the individual concerned be corrected by showing he was granted an extension of his MRD for maximum age until age 67. _______ _ __X_____ ___ CHAIRPERSON I certify that herein is recorded the true and complete record of the proceedings of the Army Board for Correction of Military Records in this case. ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20090000933 3 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 1 ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20090000933 2 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 1