Search Decisions

Decision Text

ARMY | BCMR | CY2004 | 2004103282C070208
Original file (2004103282C070208.doc) Auto-classification: Denied



                            RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


      IN THE CASE OF:


      BOARD DATE:            10 August 2004
      DOCKET NUMBER:   AR2004103282


      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             |
|     |Mrs. Nancy L. Amos                |     |Analyst              |


      The following members, a quorum, were present:

|     |Ms. Gail J. Wire                  |     |Chairperson          |
|     |Ms. Karen A. Heinz                |     |Member               |
|     |Mr. Paul M. Smith                 |     |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 that her records be corrected to show she
completed 24 months of service.

2.  The applicant states that she completed 23 months and 23 days of
service.  That leaves her 7 days short of being eligible to obtain
Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) health and education benefits.

3.  The applicant provides two DD Forms 214 (Certificate of Release or
Discharge from Active Duty).

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  The applicant initially enlisted in the Regular Army on 18 April 1990
for            4 years.  She was released from active duty on 9 July 1991
for pregnancy after completing 1 year, 2 months, and 22 days of creditable
active service and was transferred to the U. S. Army Reserve.  Available
orders show she transferred to a troop program unit (TPU) on 27 April 1992,
apparently transferred back to the Individual Ready Reserve, and
transferred again to a TPU on 16 May 1994.

2.  The applicant reenlisted in the U. S. Army Reserve (TPU) on 9 December
1997 for six years.  She was ordered to active duty on 21 January 2003 in
support of Operation Enduring Freedom.  She was discharged on 21 October
2003 for hardship after completing 9 months and 1 day of creditable active
service for this period of active duty and a total of 1 year, 11 months,
and          23 days of creditable active service.

3.  The applicant's discharge packets are not available.

4.  It cannot be determined from the available enlistment documents if the
applicant signed up for the Montgomery GI Bill (MGIB).

5.  The VA booklet, Federal Benefits for Veterans and Dependents, 2003
edition describes the variety of federal benefits available to veterans and
their dependents.  The Health Care Benefits section does not list a time-in-
service requirement prior to being eligible to obtain health benefits.
Type of discharge and service-connection are the main determinants for
health care benefits.

6.  The Education and Training section of the VA booklet describes the four
categories of MGIB eligibility.  To be eligible under Category 1, veterans
must (1)
have entered active duty for the first time after 30 June 1985; (2) not
have declined the MGIB in writing upon entry onto active duty; and (3) have
had their military pay reduced by $100 a month for the first 12 months of
active duty.  Veterans can use the MGIB benefit after completing three
continuous years of active duty, or after only two years of continuous
active duty if they first signed up for less than three years of active
duty or have an obligation to serve four years in the Selected Reserve and
enter the Selected Reserve within one year of release from active duty.

7.  The VA booklet also states that veterans who did not complete the
required period of service may still be eligible under Category 1 if
discharged for one of several reasons to include hardship.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  There is no evidence of error in the applicant's records and relief is
not granted solely for the purpose of enabling a person to take advantage
of VA benefits.

2.  Eligibility for veterans' benefits does not fall within the purview of
the Board; however, it appears that the applicant's time-in-service alone
would not be a bar to her receiving medical benefits.  In addition, since
she was discharged for hardship it appears she might be eligible for
education benefits (if she had enrolled in the MGIB).  She should contact
her servicing VA office for further clarification or assistance.

BOARD VOTE:

________  ________  ________  GRANT FULL RELIEF

________  ________  ________  GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

__gjw___  __kah___  __pms___  DENY APPLICATION

BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION:

The evidence presented does not demonstrate the existence of a probable
error or injustice.  Therefore, the Board determined that the overall
merits of this case
are insufficient as a basis for correction of the records of the individual
concerned.




            __Gail J. Wire________
                    CHAIRPERSON




                                    INDEX

|CASE ID                 |AR2004103282                            |
|SUFFIX                  |                                        |
|RECON                   |                                        |
|DATE BOARDED            |20040810                                |
|TYPE OF DISCHARGE       |                                        |
|DATE OF DISCHARGE       |                                        |
|DISCHARGE AUTHORITY     |                                        |
|DISCHARGE REASON        |                                        |
|BOARD DECISION          |DENY                                    |
|REVIEW AUTHORITY        |Mr. Chun                                |
|ISSUES         1.       |110.00                                  |
|2.                      |                                        |
|3.                      |                                        |
|4.                      |                                        |
|5.                      |                                        |
|6.                      |                                        |


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


Similar Decisions

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002074943C070403

    Original file (2002074943C070403.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    There is no evidence in the applicant's personnel records that she requested that she be released from her obligation from service with the TPU either because of hardship or another reason provided for by Paragraph 4-9, Army Regulation 140-10. The authority for her discharge was Army Regulation 135-178. The available evidence shows that the applicant was released from the TPU and reassigned to the Army Reserve Personnel Center (Standby) on 20 July 1996, before the term of service that she...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | 20110001279

    Original file (20110001279.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant states she feels she does not owe any of the money she received from the MGIB. The Certificate and Acknowledgment – USAR – Service Requirements and Methods of Fulfillment (Reserves Annex), section IV (Service Obligation), dated 25 October 2003, shows the applicant agreed to serve 6 years as an assigned member of a troop program unit (TPU) in the Selected Reserve and 2 years as an assigned member of the IRR. Her enlistment contract with annex clearly states she was obligated...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2003-02842

    Original file (BC-2003-02842.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    _________________________________________________________________ STATEMENT OF FACTS: Applicant is a prior service member of the US Air Force (USAF) with two years, two months and five days of active service before transferring to the Air National Guard (ANG) under the Palace Chase program. She served her time to qualify for her benefits and is being denied them simply because she chose to serve part time rather than not at all which would have been the case had she been separated...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-00802

    Original file (BC-2003-00802.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2003-00802 INDEX CODE: 110.02 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: Her narrative reason for separation be changed for the purpose of qualifying for Montgomery GI Bill (MGIB) benefits under Category III and Category IV. She had completed a total of 2 years, 3 months and 17 days of active service...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-01124

    Original file (BC-2003-01124.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBERS: BC-2003-01124 INDEX CODE 110.02 COUNSEL: None HEARING DESIRED: No _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: Her records reflect that she was discharged for the convenience of the government, not due to pregnancy, so she may be eligible for educational benefits under the Montgomery GI Bill (MGIB). (See Exhibit F.) On 13 Aug 02, the...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002082703C070215

    Original file (2002082703C070215.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 7 December 1998, the applicant's commander initiated action to separate the applicant for involuntary separation due to parenthood under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 5-8. The applicant’s DD Form 214 indicates in block 15a that she did not contribute to the Post-Vietnam ERA Veteran’s Educational Assistance Program. The evidence of record confirms that the applicant was honorably discharged on 6 January 1999, under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090001822

    Original file (20090001822.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    The applicant’s military records may be corrected to show her Statement for Enlistment - United States Army Enlistment Program was amended to include the sentence, "If ACF benefits in the amount of $40,000.00 (exclusive of MGIB benefits) were authorized by the official processing you for enlistment and the Government fails to pay the full amount under the appropriate provisions and such failure results in nonpayment of ACF benefits in the amount of $40,000.00 over the amount of the MGIB...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090016902

    Original file (20090016902.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    The applicant requests that she be paid $33,000.00 in Army College Fund (ACF) benefits as outlined in her enlistment contract. The applicant’s military records may be corrected to show her Statement for Enlistment - United States Army Enlistment Program was amended to include the sentence, "If ACF benefits in the amount of $33,000.00 (exclusive of MGIB benefits) were authorized by the official processing you for enlistment and the government fails to pay the full amount under the...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090008044

    Original file (20090008044.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    The applicant requests that item 28 (Narrative Reason for Separation) of her DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) be changed from sole parent to hardship. It appears that at the time of the applicant's separation, separation code MDG was entered item 26 to assist the Army with statistical data on Soldiers separating from the service by reason of sole parenthood. However, this separation code and narrative reason prohibits the applicant from receiving the...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2007 | 20070003745C071029

    Original file (20070003745C071029.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    The applicant's DA Form 3286-66 stated she was enlisting, in addition to another enlistment incentive, for the ACF for $40,000. The above correction will allow the Board to pay the applicant an additional ACF payment up to $19,286.00 or $536.00 per month in 36 monthly installments, for the time she was/is enrolled in an approved program of education. As a result, the Board recommends that Department of the Army records of the individual concerned be corrected by amending her DA Form...