MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION


         IN THE CASE OF:



         BOARD DATE: 17 APRIL 2003
         DOCKET NUMBER: AR2002077639

         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
Mr. Kenneth H. Aucock		Analyst

The following members, a quorum, were present:

Mr. Walter T. Morrison		Chairperson
Mr. Harry B. Oberg		Member
Mr. Ronald J. Weaver		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, the applicant is requesting that he be credited with 20 qualifying years of service for retirement at age 60. He requests redistribution of his retirement points in order to achieve 20 qualifying years.

APPLICANT STATES: That he has 311 points for redistribution to make up for those years in which he does not have the necessary 50 points necessary for a qualifying year of service. He states that his total points for 1985 should be corrected to show 54 retirement points (instead of the 44 points shown). For 1988 and 1989, he provides additional documentation to reflect a total of 50 points for each year; however, if necessary, 311 points are available for redistribution. Documentation and additional statements are contained in the evidence of record.

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

The applicant served as an enlisted member in the Marine Corps from 1960 to 1964, in the Marine Corps Reserve from 1964 to 1966, and then had a break in service until his entry in the Marine Corps Reserve on 12 May 1977. On 22 April 1978 the applicant accepted a commission as a Reserve captain in the Medical Service Corps. The applicant was a lieutenant colonel in the Army Reserve assigned to a medical activity at Fort Carson, Colorado as an individual mobilization augmentee (IMA), when on 14 September 1993, he was transferred to the Retired Reserve because he had reached the maximum authorized years of service.

On 22 April 2002 the applicant requested assistance from the Army Review Boards Agency in St. Louis concerning his retirement points, stating that the supervisor of the retirements and annuities [section] at the Army Reserve Personnel Command recommended that he submit an application [to this Board] requesting a redistribution of points.

On 26 June 2002 the above mentioned supervisor informed the Army Review Boards Agency at St. Louis that he had discussed the applicant's situation with him. He stated that the redistribution of retirement points was not within the scope of the command's authority, and that the applicant had not addressed the reason that he failed to achieve qualifying years in those years he requested a redistribution of points.

On 19 July 2002 a member of this agency [at Arlington] informed the applicant that in order for the Board to consider his application, he needed to provide additional justification – that in addition to stating his reasons for wanting his retirement points corrected, he needed also to provide documentation.

In a 6 August 2002 response, the applicant stated that he had accumulated enough points each year (even exceeding 50 points in some years) to qualify for a 20-year retirement. He stated that when he learned of the discrepancies for 1985, 1988, and 1989, in an attempt to obtain documentation, he traveled to Fort Carson; however, he was informed they no longer had his records. He stated that there was an error in his retirement points for 1985 in that his active duty points should be 34, instead of 24. He submitted a copy of a 30 January 1985 order placing him on active duty for 14 days beginning on 3 March 1985; and a 20 March 1985 order placing him on active duty for 20 days beginning on 25 April 1985. He submitted a 20 April 1993 diploma from the Command and General Staff College to compensate for the years 1988 and 1989, a copy of a certificate of achievement for providing outstanding service at the Fort Lewis Installation Detention Facility from 13 January to 3 February 1988, and a copy of a diploma from the Army Training Support Center at Fort Eustis dated 6 October 1982 showing completion of the infantry officer advanced course.

The applicant provided a list of his total points for his years of service dating from 1977 through 1992, showing how available points for those years could be redistributed to the nonqualifying years 1964, 1965, 1985, 1988, 1989, and 1993.

There are two chronological statements of the applicant's retirement points. Both show that he had 17 years of qualifying service for retirement purposes. His retirement year (RY) initially was from 13 September, the day and month he enlisted in the Marine Corps, to 12 September of the following year. However, because of his break in service, his retirement year changed upon his entry in the Marine Corps Reserve on 12 May 1977. His new RY was from 12 May to 11 May of the following year.

Those statements show 4 qualifying years of service while he was in the Marine Corps; no qualifying years for the 2 years in the Marine Corps Reserve after his release from active duty, earning only 15 membership points for each of those years; a break in service from 1966 to 1977; and 13 qualifying years from 1977 until his transfer to the Retired Reserve in 1993. His RY ending on 11 May 1986 shows he was credited with 44 retirement points; his RY ending on 11 May 1989, 48 retirement points; and his RY ending on 11 May 1990, 41 retirement points. None of those three RY was a qualifying year for retirement purposes.

Army Regulation 135-180 implements statutory authorities governing the granting of retired pay to soldiers and former Reserve Component soldiers. Paragraph 2-1 of that regulation states, in pertinent part, that to be eligible for retired pay, an individual need not have a military status at the time of application, but must have attained age 60, completed a minimum of 20 years of qualifying service, and served the last 8 years of his qualifying service as a Reserve component soldier. A reserve soldier must earn a minimum of 50 retirement points each retirement year to have that year credited as qualifying service. When a person is in an active status for a period less than a full retirement year, a minimum number of retirement points are required to be earned in order to have that period credited as qualifying service.

Army Regulation 140-185 prescribes the types of training and activities for which retirement points are authorized and the procedures for recording retirement point credits and training for Reserve soldiers. After 1 July 1949, the retirement year (RY) will be the date of initial entry or reentry (after a break in service) into a Reserve component, or date of transfer to the Reserve component upon release from active duty, or date of transfer from an inactive Reserve status to an active Reserve status. The retirement year once established will not change as long as the soldier has continuous service in a Reserve and/or regular component.

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 applicant has not provided any good reason for this Board to grant his request to credit him with 20 qualifying years of service for retirement purposes. The redistribution of points, to suit him because he did not do what he had to, earn retirement points to obtain the necessary qualifying years, is not appropriate. This redistribution of points as he asks would give him an unfair advantage over soldiers in a like situation, and would also be unfair to soldiers who were justifiably credited with 20 qualifying years. It would in effect, belittle the system for awarding retirement points. A soldier with 10, or 12, or 15 qualifying years could also reason as the applicant has done - a redistribution of the excess points earned during qualifying years to make up for those years the soldier did not earn 50 points. There is no injustice done to him, nor is there an error concerning his records.

2. Notwithstanding his contentions concerning an error in his retirement points for 1985 (RY beginning on 12 May of that year and ending on 11 May 1986), the points that he earned for the 14 days of active duty that he performed beginning on 20 March 1985 would have been credited to his RY beginning on 12 May 1984 and ending on 11 May 1985; as would the points that he earned for 17 of the 20 days of active duty that he performed beginning on 25 April 1985. He earned 114 retirement points for that RY (1984-1985), but only 44 for the succeeding RY, 24 of which were for points that he earned while on active duty, 3 of which are presumably as a result of the ending 3 days (12-14 May 1985) of active duty which began on 25 April 1985.

3. By the same token, points awarded for his completion of the Command and General Staff College on 20 April 1993 were credited to his RY beginning in 1992 and ending on 11 May 1993. His record shows that he received 113 extension points for that RY.

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

5. 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 that requirement.

6. 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

__WTM _ __HBO__ ___RJW_ DENY APPLICATION

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

---

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2002077639
SUFFIX
RECON	YYYYMMDD
DATE BOARDED	20030417
TYPE OF DISCHARGE	(HD, GD, UOTHC, UD, BCD, DD, UNCHAR)
DATE OF DISCHARGE	YYYYMMDD
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY	AR . . . . .
DISCHARGE REASON
BOARD DECISION	DENY
REVIEW AUTHORITY
ISSUES 1.	135.00
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.