RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


      IN THE CASE OF:


      BOARD DATE:           3 March 2005
      DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20040001868


      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               |     |Director             |
|     |Mr. Joseph A. Adriance            |     |Analyst              |


      The following members, a quorum, were present:

|     |Mr. Fred Eichorn                  |     |Chairperson          |
|     |Ms. Margaret K. Patterson         |     |Member               |
|     |Ms. Carol A. Kornhoff             |     |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).

THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE:

1.  The applicant requests, in effect, that he be given an antedated
reenlistment contract in the Individual Ready Reserve (IRR) of the United
States Army Reserve (USAR) in order to allow the reinstatement of his
Voluntary Separation Incentive (VSI) payments.

2.  The applicant states, in effect, that he has been attempting to obtain
an antedated contract from Human Resources Command, St. Louis, Missouri
(HRC-St. Louis) since 2001.  He states that he had trouble obtaining his
physical examination, but it is now completed.  However, he is told that
HRC St. Louis is unable to antedate his reenlistment contract and he was
advised to apply to this Board for relief.  He claims that he has
continuously tried to correct this problem through the Enlisted Personnel
Management Directorate (EPMD), HRC-St. Louis since April 2001.  EPMD
officials advised him to apply to this Board for relief.

3.  The applicant provides the following documents in support of his
application:  Military Personnel Records Jacket (MPRJ) Documents, Discharge
Orders, Physical Examination Results, HRC-St. Louis Memorandum, and HRC-St.
Louis Inspector General (IG) Report.

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  The applicant’s military records show that he served on active duty in
the Regular Army for 16 years and 10 months until being honorably separated
under the provisions of the Fiscal Year 1992 Enlisted Voluntary Early
Separation Program on 1 April 1992.

2.  The DD Form 214 issued to the applicant on the date of his separation
from active duty, 1 April 1992, confirms he was authorized an annual VSI
payment of $7,621.97 for 33 years.  This document also shows that he was
transferred to the IRR based on his 2 April 1992 six year enlistment in the
USAR.

3.  USAR Personnel Command Orders Number D-03-017509, dated 21 March 2000,
directed the applicant’s discharge from the USAR on that date.  The
authority listed in these orders was Army Regulation 135-178.

4.  On 30 April 2004, the HRC-St. Louis acting EPMD director notified the
applicant his request for an antedated reenlistment contract was denied.
The reason for the denial was that the governing regulation prohibited HRC-
St. Louis from antedating contracts that exceed the maximum term of
enlistment of six years.  The applicant was advised to apply to this Board
for relief and that
HRC-St. Louis would recommend approval.

5.  On 3 May 2004, the HRC-St. Louis IG provided the applicant a final
response to his request for assistance in obtaining an antedated
reenlistment contract.  The IG informed the applicant that records
indicated he attempts to complete his physical examination within the
required timeframe failed due to administrative error, but HRC St. Louis
did not have the authority to antedate a reenlistment contract when the
time exceeded the maximum term of six years.  The IG further informed the
applicant that the only administrative avenue available to him at that
point was application to this Board.

6.  In connection with the processing of this case, an advisory opinion was
obtained from the HRC-St. Louis Acting EPMD Director.  This official
indicated that HRC, St. Louis did not have that authority to antedate
reenlistment contracts when the time exceeds the maximum term or enlistment
of six years.  However, in the applicant’s case, full relief is
recommended.  The applicant was provided a copy of this advisory opinion
and concurred with its contents on 21 August 2004.

7.  Department of Defense Military Pay and Allowances Entitlements Manual
(DODPM), based on Public Law 102-190, 5 December 1991, as amended,
prescribes the qualifications for entitlement to readjustment benefits for
certain voluntary separated members.  The VSI was one of the monetary
benefits associated with this incentive program.  The policy published to
support the military drawdown stipulated that members approved for VSI
would be paid in annual installments commencing on their departure date
from active duty, and on each anniversary date thereafter for twice the
number of years on active duty, provided that the member continued to serve
in the Ready Reserve.  It further stipulated that VSI annual payments would
be discontinued if the member was separated from the Ready Reserve, unless
the individual became ineligible to continue to serve due to medical or age
limitations.  In these cases, the member would be transferred to the
Standby Reserve or the Retired Reserve.

8.  Army Regulation 140-111 (USAR Reenlistment Program) prescribes
policies, responsibilities, and procedures for the USAR Reenlistment
Program.  Table 2-5 contains guidance on the reenlistment terms of service
authorized for continued USAR membership in the IRR.  It states, in
pertinent part, that terms of service for continued membership may be for
three, four, five or six years.
DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The evidence of record confirms the applicant made a good faith effort
to complete his physical examination and to reenlist before the six year
maximum term of enlistment was exceeded in order to maintain his
eligibility to receive his earned annual authorized VSI payments.  This
fact is evidenced by the
HRC-St. Louis Acting EPMD Director and IG in their memorandums to the
applicant.

2.  Further, it is clear USAR personnel officials support granting the
applicant full relief based on the administrative errors made in the
processing of his physical examination, as evidenced by the recommendation
contained in the
HRC, St. Louis advisory opinion.  Therefore, it would serve the interest of
justice and equity to antedate enlistment contracts in the IRR that would
restore the applicant’s eligibility to receive his remaining annual VSI
payments.

BOARD VOTE:

___CAK_  ___MKP_  ___FE___  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
providing him antedated six year reenlistment contracts in the IRR,
effective
2 April 1998 and 2 April 2004; by restoring his entitlement to annual VSI
payments; and by authorizing him retroactive payment of any lost VSI
payments that resulted from his discharge from the USAR.




            ____Fred Eichorn______
                    CHAIRPERSON

                                    INDEX

|CASE ID                 |AR20040001868                           |
|SUFFIX                  |                                        |
|RECON                   |                                        |
|DATE BOARDED            |2005/03/03                              |
|TYPE OF DISCHARGE       |HD                                      |
|DATE OF DISCHARGE       |2000/03/21                              |
|DISCHARGE AUTHORITY     |AR 135-178                              |
|DISCHARGE REASON        |                                        |
|BOARD DECISION          |GRANT                                   |
|REVIEW AUTHORITY        |                                        |
|ISSUES         1.  333  |135.0100                                |
|2.                      |                                        |
|3.                      |                                        |
|4.                      |                                        |
|5.                      |                                        |
|6.                      |                                        |


-----------------------
[pic]