Title: APPLICANT REQUESTS: In effect, the applicant requests that he be granted educational benefits because he was not afforded the opportunity to make a lump sum payment of $1200
Author: WoodsHN

ABCMR Memorandum of                       AC97-10800
Consideration (cont)

APPLICANT REQUESTS:  In effect, the applicant requests that he be granted educational benefits because he was not afforded the opportunity to make a lump sum payment of $1200.00 prior to his discharge.   

APPLICANT STATES:  That he retired from the National Guard with no educational benefits.  He was not given the opportunity to participate in the Montgomery GI Bill (MGIB).

EVIDENCE OF RECORD:  The applicant's military records show:

The applicant entered the Army on 15 March 1977 and served on continuous active duty until his honorable discharge on 
31 March 1985.  His DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) indicates he did not participate in the post-Vietnam era Veteran’s Educational Assistance Program (VEAP).  This information has been confirmed with the VA. 

He enlisted in the California Army National Guard (CAARNG) for one year on 4 April 1986, serving with that organization in both troop program units and in an Active Guard/Reserve (AGR) status until his discharge and transfer to the Retired Reserve in 1995.

On 11 January 1987 he extended his enlistment in the CAARNG for six years.  The applicant again extended his enlistment on 3 June 1993, making his new ETS 3 June 1996.

On 10 August 1994 the applicant requested an early retirement for hardship under the provisions of an AGR temporary early retirement authority program.  He was discharged from the Army National Guard on 30 April 1995 and transferred to the Retired Reserve.  He had 18 years, 
1 month, and 24 days of total service for pay.

Title 38 U.S.C. Chapter 30, section 3012, specifies the basic educational assistance entitlement for service in the Selected Reserve and states, in effect that an individual who after 30 June 1985 first becomes a member of the Armed Forces or first enters on active duty as a member of the Armed Forces, and continues on active duty or in the Selected Reserve is entitled to basic educational assistance under this chapter.

Information obtained from the Total Army Personnel Command Educational Incentives Branch indicates that the Montgomery GI Bill passed by Congress became effective 1 July 1985 and all enlisted members who first entered active duty during the period 1 July 1985 to 30 June 1988 are eligible.  The program was also available for selected reserve members who agreed to serve not less than six years after 1 July 1985.  Soldiers who first entered active duty between 
1 January 1977 and 30 June 1985 must have initially enrolled in VEAP to attain eligibility.  

Information obtained from the VA indicates that VEAP allowed active duty personnel to voluntarily participate in a plan for education, and that soldiers were eligible to enroll if they entered active duty for the first time after 
31 December 1976 and before 1 July 1985.  Soldiers who contributed to VEAP before being involuntarily separated from active duty with an honorable discharge could elect before separation to receive MGIB (active duty) benefits. VEAP participants on active duty could make an irrevocable election to transfer to the MGIB (active duty) program.

DISCUSSION:  Considering all the evidence, allegations, and information presented by the applicant, together with the evidence of record, applicable law and regulations, and advisory opinion(s), it is concluded:

1.  The applicant first entered on active duty on 
15 March 1977 making him ineligible for MGIB benefits.  He was not involuntarily separated from active duty in 
March of 1985, nor did he participate in the VEAP program, making him ineligible to transfer to the MGIB.

2.  The applicant has submitted neither probative evidence nor a convincing argument in support of his request.   

3.  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 the aforementioned requirement.

4.  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

                       DENY APPLICATION

						Karl F. Schneider
						Acting Director