ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20060001747
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
IN THE CASE OF:
BOARD DATE: 5 October 2006
DOCKET NUMBER: AR20060001747
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 / DirectorMr. W. W. Osborn, Jr. / Analyst
The following members, a quorum, were present:
Mr. James B. Gunlicks / ChairpersonMr. Michael J. Flynn / Member
Mr. Scott W. Faught / Member
The Board considered the following evidence:
Exhibit A - Application for correction of military records.
Exhibit B - Military Personnel Records (including advisory opinion, if any).
1
ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20060001747
THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE:
1. The applicant requests that her record be corrected to show that she was a member of the United States Army Reserve (USAR) Reserve Officer Training Corps (ROTC)/Simultaneous Membership Program (SMP) while enrolled in ROTC at the University of Southern Mississippi.
2. The applicant states that this time is not recorded on her DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty). This oversight could have significant impact upon her retirement points total.
3. The applicant provides copies of her 1986 and 2002 DD Forms 214, an April 1981 DA Form 3686 Leave and Earnings Statement showing that she attended two USAR inactive duty training assemblies each on 11 April and 12 April 1981, her 27 August 1979 enlistment contract for ROTC, orders discharging her from ROTC to accept a commission, appointment as a USAR commissioned officer showing a date of acceptance of 15 May 1982 and orders to active duty .
CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:
1. The applicant enlisted in the United States Army Reserve (USAR) on 27August 1979. Her DD Form 4/1 Enlistment/Reenlistment Document – Armed Forces of the United States indicates at item 10b (Remarks) “AuthorityAR 145-1, USAR Control Group (Reserve Officer Training Corps (ROTC)).”
2. On 22 December 1980 she was relieved from the ROTC Control Group to participate in the ROTC/SMP program and was assigned to the 305th Field Hospital.
3. On 14 May 1982 she was separated from the USAR (Ready) and the ROTC to accept an appointment as a USAR commissioned officer. On 15 May 1982 she was appointed a Reserve second lieutenant in the Ordnance Corps.
4. The applicant served on active duty from 19 June 1982 to 11 July 1986, a period of 4 years and 29 days. She was relieved from active duty and transferred to the USAR Control Group (Reinforcement). Item 12e (Total Prior Inactive Service) of her DD Form 214 shows 1 month, and 4 days.
5. The applicant also served on active duty from 24 October 2001 to 20September 2002 when she was relieved from active duty and transferred to
the USAR Control Group IMA (Individual Mobilization Augmentee). Item 12d (Total Prior Active Service) of her DD Form 214 shows 5 years, 7 months, and 0 days and item 12e (Total Prior Inactive Service) shows 13 years, 10 months, and 9 days.
6. Orders dated 30 August 2002 indicated that the applicant was to be discharged effective 1 September 2002, but she was apparently discharged after her release from active duty.
7. During the processing of this case an advisory opinion was obtained from Human Resources Command (HRC), St Louis. The Supervisor, Retirements and Annuities noted that the applicant had, indeed, been in the SMP program up until the time she was discharged to accept a commission and that the time should have been reflected on her DD Form 214 as prior inactive duty. It was also noted that the applicant’s Date of Initial Entry into Military Service should be adjusted to 27August 1979. It was also pointed out that her involuntary separation may have been improper because she had apparently completed 19 years, 5 months, and 9 days of commissioned service.
8. The above calculation indicating 19 years, 5 months, and 9 days of commissioned service ignores the 10 months and 27 days of active duty reported on that DD Form 214, itself. The applicant actually had 20 years, 4 months, and 6 days of commissioned service when she was released from active duty on 20September 2002.
9. The advisory opinion was forwarded to the applicant for comment and she concurred.
DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:
1. Prior to entering active duty as a USAR commissioned officer, the applicant spent 2 years, 7 months, and 22 days in an inactive duty status, including 1 year, 4months, and 23 days in the SMP. This period on prior inactive duty should be entered in item 12e of her original DD Form 214.
2. The fact that she had more prior inactive service than was reported on her first DD Form 214 is supported by the advisory opinion from HRC, St Louis.
3. The applicant may have evidence of more inactive duty training or active duty training than that on the Leave and Earnings Statement submitted with this application. She should submit copies to HRC, St Louis and request that her retirement points be corrected well before she reaches age 60.
4. Except for corrections that necessarily follow from an applicant’s application, the board does not have authority to further presume and undertake correction of an individual’s records. Therefore, the issue of the applicant’s discharge that was raised in the advisory opinion will not be addressed.
BOARD VOTE:
__JBG___ __MJF__ __SWF__ 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 and to excuse failure to timely file. As a result, the Board recommends that all Department of the Army records of the individual concerned be corrected by showing in Item 12e of her 11 July 1986
DD Form 214 that she had 2 years, 7 months, and 22 days of Total Prior Inactive Service.
__James B. Gunlicks___
CHAIRPERSON
INDEX
CASE ID / AR20060001747SUFFIX
RECON
DATE BOARDED / 2006/10/05
TYPE OF DISCHARGE
DATE OF DISCHARGE
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY
DISCHARGE REASON
BOARD DECISION / GRANT
REVIEW AUTHORITY
ISSUES 1. 135.00
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
1