RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


      IN THE CASE OF:


      BOARD DATE:            1 September 2005
      DOCKET NUMBER:   AR20050000137


      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:

|     |Mr. Stanley Kelley                |     |Chairperson          |
|     |Ms. Barbara J. Ellis              |     |Member               |
|     |Mr. Richard T. Dunbar             |     |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 his former spouse's eligibility for
continued medical care be continued under the 20/20/20 rule.

2.  The applicant states he was medically retired [on 22 September 1997].
He married his former spouse, Karen, on 30 August 1975 and his basic active
service date (BASD) is 30 October 1974.  That gives him 22 years and 22
days of marriage to Karen during his basic active service.  His last period
of entry on active duty was 28 October 1977; however, he enlisted in the
Delayed Entry Program on 4 October 1977, for which Karen should receive
credit.

3.  The applicant provides two DD Forms 214 (Certificate of Release or
Discharge from Active Duty); his DD Form 1966/1 (Application for Enlistment
– Armed Forces of the United States); his marriage certificate; his DA Form
2A (Personnel Qualification Record Part I); his final divorce decree; and
an undated, handwritten note.

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  The applicant enlisted in the U. S. Army Reserve on 13 February 1968.
He enlisted in the Regular Army on 7 June 1968.  He was released from
active duty on 4 June 1971.  His terminal date of Reserve obligation was 12
February 1974.  There is no evidence to show he continued to serve in the
U. S. Army Reserve after 12 February 1974.

2.  The applicant married Karen on 30 August 1975.

3.  The applicant enlisted in the U. S. Army Reserve on 4 October 1977.  On
    28 October 1977, 24 days later, he enlisted in the Regular Army.  At
that time, his pay entry basic date (PEBD) was determined to be 4 October
1971 and his basic active service date was determined to be 30 October
1974.

4.  The applicant was released from active duty on 21 September 1997 due to
a permanent disability after completing 19 years, 10 months, and 24 days of
creditable active service that period and a total of 22 years, 10 months,
and      22 days of creditable active service.

5.  The applicant and Karen divorced on 25 June 2004.

6.  The applicant provided an undated note from an individual identified as
"Ann N___" who wrote Karen was "a 20/20/20."

7.  Title 10, U. S. Code, section 1071 states the purpose of chapter 55
(Medical and Dental Care) is to create and maintain high morale in the
uniformed services by providing an improved and uniform program of medical
and dental care for members and certain former members of those services
and for their dependents.

8.  Title 10, U. S. Code, section 1072(2)(F) defines "dependent" as the
unremarried former spouse of a member or former member who, on the date of
the final decree of divorce, had been married to the member or former
member for a period of at least 20 years during which period the member or
former member performed at least 20 years of service creditable for retired
pay and does not have coverage under an employer-sponsored health plan.

9.  Title 10, U. S. Code, section 1072(2)(G) further defines "dependent" as
a person who is the unremarried former spouse of a member or former member
who performed at least 20 years of service creditable for retired pay, and
on the date of the final decree of divorce before 1 April 1985, had been
married to the member or former member for a period of at least 20 years,
at least 15 of which were during the period the member or former member
performed service creditable for retired pay and does not have coverage
under an employer-sponsored health plan.

10.  Title 10, U. S. Code, section 1072(2)(H) further defines "dependent"
as a person who would qualify as a dependent under clause (G) but for the
fact the date of the final decree of divorce is on or after 1 April 1985,
except that the term does not include the person after the end of the one-
year period beginning on the date of that final decree.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  Eligibility for medical benefits for former spouses under the
provisions of Title 10, U. S. Code, section 1071 is not contingent or based
upon the service member's BASD or PEBD.

2.  Title 10, U. S. Code, section 1072(2)(F), in pertinent part, defines
"dependent" as the unremarried former spouse of a former member who, on the
date of the final decree of divorce, had been married to the former member
for a period of at least 20 years during which period the former member
performed at least 20 years of service creditable for retired pay (emphasis
added).  In other words, there must be at least a 20-year overlap of the
marriage and the service.

3.  The applicant married Karen on 30 August 1975.  There is no evidence to
show, and he does not contend, that he was in any military status at that
time.  He regained a military status on 4 October 1977 when he enlisted in
the U. S. Army Reserve Delayed Entry Program.  He was released from active
duty on     21 September 1997 after completing 19 years, 10 months, and 24
days of creditable active service.  Including the 24 days he spent in the
Delayed Entry Program, he completed 19 years, 11 months, and 18 days of
service creditable for pay.  That is, his marriage to Karen overlapped his
service by less than        20 years and she therefore does not meet the
20/20/20 rule.

4.  The applicant's former spouse meets the 20/20/15 rule; however, because
they were divorced after 1 April 1985 she lost her "dependent" status for
the purposes of obtaining medical and dental care upon the first
anniversary of their divorce.

5.  Regrettably, there is insufficient evidence on which to grant the
relief requested.

BOARD VOTE:

________  ________  ________  GRANT FULL RELIEF

________  ________  ________  GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

__sk____  __bje___  __rtd___  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.




            __Stanley Kelley______
                    CHAIRPERSON




                                    INDEX

|CASE ID                 |AR20050000137                           |
|SUFFIX                  |                                        |
|RECON                   |                                        |
|DATE BOARDED            |20050901                                |
|TYPE OF DISCHARGE       |                                        |
|DATE OF DISCHARGE       |                                        |
|DISCHARGE AUTHORITY     |                                        |
|DISCHARGE REASON        |                                        |
|BOARD DECISION          |DENY                                    |
|REVIEW AUTHORITY        |Mr. Chun                                |
|ISSUES         1.       |100.00                                  |
|2.                      |                                        |
|3.                      |                                        |
|4.                      |                                        |
|5.                      |                                        |
|6.                      |                                        |


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