RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


	IN THE CASE OF:	  


	BOARD DATE:	  19 April 2007
	DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20060012105 


	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.


	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, payment of a Regular Reenlistment Bonus (RRB) of $2,000.00 from his reenlistment on 5 May 1972, which he incorrectly referred to as 4 May 1972.

2.  The applicant essentially states that when he reenlisted on 5 May 1972, he was told he was not eligible for an RRB because it was too early.  He also states, in effect, that his regular expiration of term of service (ETS) at the time was 
7 September 1972.  He further states that he was told on other reenlistments that he was not eligible for an RRB.

3.  The applicant provides a portion of the documents related to his reenlistment on 5 May 1972, three DD Forms 214 (Armed Forces of the United States Report of Transfer or Discharge) issued to him on 18 January 1960, 30 August 1967, and 4 May 1972, a DD Form 214 (Report of Separation From Active Duty) that was issued to him on 21 February 1978, a DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge From Active Duty) that was issued at the time of his retirement on 31 January 1987, and his DA Form 2-1 (Personnel Qualification Record – Part II) in support of this application.

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  The applicant is requesting correction of an alleged injustice which occurred on 31 January 1987, the date of his retirement from the Regular Army.  The application submitted in this case is dated 17 August 2006.

2.  Title 10, U.S. Code, Section 1552(b), provides that applications for correction of military records must be filed within 3 years after discovery of the alleged error or injustice.  This provision of law allows the Army Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR) to excuse failure to file within the 3-year statute of limitations if the ABCMR determines that it would be in the interest of justice to do so.  In this case, the ABCMR will conduct a review of the merits of the case to determine if it would be in the interest of justice to excuse the applicant’s failure to timely file.

3.  The applicant’s military records show that he reenlisted in the Regular Army on 5 May 1972.   The applicant reenlisted consecutively, along with a pair of extensions, on 22 February 1978 and 6 December 1985 without any breaks in service.  The reenlistment contracts show that he was not authorized any reenlistment bonuses.  The applicant retired on 31 January 1987. 

4.  The applicant essentially stated that when he reenlisted on 5 May 1972, he was told he was not eligible for an RRB because it was too early.  

5.  The applicant did not provide any Leave and Earning Statements (LESs) with his application.  It should be noted that the applicant was both a Recruiter and a Finance Specialist during his career in the Regular Army.

6.  During the processing of this case, an advisory opinion was obtained from the Force Alignment Division, United States Army Human Resources Command, Alexandria, Virginia.  That office recommended disapproval of the applicant’s request, and stated that the applicant failed to provide sufficient documentation indicating that he never received an RRB.  

7.  A copy of the advisory opinion was provided to the applicant for comment and/or rebuttal.  In a letter, dated 18 March 2007, the applicant responded by essentially stating that he did not receive his RRB and provided all of his 
DD Forms 214 as proof of non-receipt.  He also stated that if an RRB is paid, a notation is indicated on the DD Form 214 for reenlistment purposes.  He further stated, in effect, that if a partial RRB payment is made, this is documented on the DD Form 214 as well.  He concluded by essentially stating that it would appear to him that sufficient documentation to provide he did not receive an RRB was provided by him because none of his DD Forms 214 indicate payment of an RRB.

8.  The RRB was available to Soldiers who were on active federal service on 1 June 1974 and continued to reenlist without a break in service of more than 3 months.  They are eligible to receive the RRB or a combination of the RRB and the later Selective Reenlistment Bonus (SRB) not to exceed $2,000.00 during an entire 20-year career.  If a Soldier has previously received an SRB, there is no entitlement to an RRB unless the SRB was less than $2,000.00.  The RRB was a $2000 lump sum payment.  If a Soldier has a break in service of more than 
3 months after 1 June 1974, the Soldier was no longer eligible for the RRB.

9.  The burden of proof is on the applicant to prove that he has not been paid an RRB.  The applicant must provide copies of enlistment and reenlistment contracts, copies of any DD Forms 214, and copies of LESs for the period of entitlement.  If records are unavailable, the Comptroller General has ruled that the claim must be disallowed.

10.  Army Regulation 15-185 (Army Board for Correction of Military Records) prescribes the policies and procedures for correction of military records by the Secretary of the Army, acting through the ABCMR.  This regulation provides that the ABCMR begins its consideration of each case with the presumption of administrative regularity.  The applicant has the burden of proving an error or injustice by a preponderance of the evidence.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant contends that he should receive an RRB payment of $2,000.00 from his reenlistment on 5 May 1972.

2.  While the Board does not doubt the veracity of the applicant’s claim to entitlement to an RRB from his reenlistment on 5 May 1972, the RRB did not become effective until 1 June 1974.  However, it appears that the applicant did not have a break in service after 1 June 1974, and reenlisted, and would have been eligible for an RRB.  

3.  The applicant was both a Recruiter and a Finance Specialist during his career in the Army and he did not provide LESs which conclusively show that he was not paid an RRB.  Therefore, he has not proven that an error or injustice occurred by a preponderance of the evidence.  In view of the foregoing, there is no basis for granting relief to the applicant in this case.

4.  Records show the applicant should have discovered the alleged error or injustice now under consideration on 31 January 1987; therefore, the time for the applicant to file a request for correction of any error or injustice expired on 
30 January 1990.  The applicant did not file within the 3-year statute of limitations and has not provided a compelling explanation or evidence to show that it would be in the interest of justice to excuse failure to timely file in this case.

BOARD VOTE:

________  ________  ________  GRANT FULL RELIEF 

________  ________  ________  GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF 

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

___JS___  __DH ___  __JH____  DENY APPLICATION

BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION:

1.  The Board determined that 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.

2.  As a result, the Board further determined that there is no evidence provided which shows that it would be in the interest of justice to excuse the applicant's failure to timely file this application within the 3-year statute of limitations prescribed by law.  Therefore, there is insufficient basis to waive the statute of limitations for timely filing or for correction of the records of the individual concerned.




_______John Slone__________
          CHAIRPERSON




INDEX

CASE ID
AR20060012105
SUFFIX

RECON
YYYYMMDD
DATE BOARDED
20070419
TYPE OF DISCHARGE
(HD, GD, UOTHC, UD, BCD, DD, UNCHAR)
DATE OF DISCHARGE
YYYYMMDD
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY
AR . . . . .  
DISCHARGE REASON

BOARD DECISION
DENY
REVIEW AUTHORITY
AR 15-185
ISSUES         1.
112.1100.0000
2.

3.

4.

5.

6.