RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


      IN THE CASE OF:


      BOARD DATE:        1 May 2007
      DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20060013131


      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. Gerard W. Schwartz            |     |Acting Director      |
|     |Mr. Joseph A. Adriance            |     |Analyst              |


      The following members, a quorum, were present:

|     |Mr. Paul M. Smith                 |     |Chairperson          |
|     |Mr. David K. Hassenritter         |     |Member               |
|     |Mr. Edward E. Montgomery          |     |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 her date of rank (DOR) to
captain (CPT) be changed from 4 November 2001 to 1 August 2000, her
original DOR.

2.  The applicant states, in effect, that as a Reserve Officer Training
Corps (ROTC) officer, she understood her Military Service Obligation (MSO)
to be
8 years.  However, after her first 4 years in the military, she though she
was released from active duty (REFRAD) and transferred into the Individual
Ready Reserve (IRR) to complete her MSO.  She states that to her dismay,
she found that she had been completely discharged from the military.  She
states that before her REFRAD, she requested entrance into the IRR, and
before her separation, she was led to believe she was entering the IRR.
From 8 January 2001 through 12 September 2001, she believed she was in the
IRR.  After the tragic events of 11 September 2001, she felt compelled to
transfer from the IRR to a Troop Program Unit (TPU) and at this time, the
administrative section of the unit she was trying to join informed her she
was not in the IRR, and that she had been completely discharged from the
Army.  Between September 2001 and April 2002, she toiled through paperwork
and Army recruiting centers to gain entrance back into the military.  She
states that upon her return to the Army, her DOR was changed from 1 August
2000 to 4 November 2001 due to her break in service.  She claims this break
in service was completely involuntary and she never wanted to leave the
military.  She is now requesting that her DOR be changed back to 1 August
2000.

3.  The applicant provides the following documents in support of her
application:  Captain Promotion Orders (United States Army Personnel
Command (PERSCOM) Order Number 194-034, dated 12 July 2000); ROTC Contract
(DA Form 597-3); and Separation Orders (Headquarters, National Training
Center and Fort Irwin, Fort Irwin, California, Orders Number 271-33, dated
27 September 2000.

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  On 17 December 1992, the applicant enlisted in the United States Army
Reserve (USAR), in the rank of private/E-1 (PV1) for 8 years, and on
5 December 1994, she reenlisted in the USAR for the purpose of entering
into the Army ROTC program as a cadet.

2.  The Army Senior ROTC Scholarship Cadet Contract entered into by the
applicant on 5 December 1994, specified, in Item 3-d, that the applicant
would be obligated to serve two, three, or four years on active duty as a
commissioned officer in the United States Army as prescribed by relevant
Army regulations based on the needs of the Army, followed by service in the
Reserve Components (RC) until the remainder of her 8-year MSO had been
served.

3.  On 7 January 1997, the applicant was commissioned a second lieutenant
in the USAR and entered active duty in that status.  On 7 July 1998, she
was promoted to first lieutenant and on 1 August 2000, she was promoted to
CPT.

4.  On 7 January 2001, upon completion of 4 years and 1 day of active
military service, the applicant was honorably discharged under the
provisions of Paragraph 3-5, Army Regulation 600-8-24, for
miscellaneous/general reasons.  The DD Form 214 issued to the applicant
upon her discharge contains the entry "0000  00  00" in Item 6 (Reserve
Obligation Termination Date) and the entry "NA" in Item 9 (Command to Which
Transferred).  It also contains the entry "Discharge" in Item 23 (Type of
Separation), and the applicant authenticated this document with her
signature on the date of her discharge.

5.  On 10 April 2002, the applicant was appointed a CPT in the USAR, where
she remains serving.

6.  Army Regulation 600-8-24 (Officer Transfers and Discharges) prescribes
the Army's officer separation and discharge policy.  Chapter 3 contains
guidance on unqualified resignations.  It states, in pertinent part, that
any officer on active duty may tender a tender a resignation.  It further
states that normally resignations will not be accepted unless on the
requested date of separation, the officer has fulfilled the active duty
service obligation incurred by participation in a fully funded
commissioning program and the statutory 8-year MSO.

7.  Army Regulation 135-91 (Service Obligations, Methods of Fulfillment,
Participation Requirements, and Enforcement Procedures) defines Army
National Guard of the United States (ARNGUS) and U.S. Army Reserve (USAR)
service obligations.  It prescribes policies and procedures governing the
various types of service obligations and participation requirements.
Paragraph 2-1 contains guidance on the statutory obligation.  It states
that the statutory MSO is incurred on initial entry into the Armed Forces
whether by induction, enlistment, or appointment.  It further states that
on and after 1 June 1984, all Soldiers incurred an 8-year statutory MSO.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant's contention that she should have been transferred into
the IRR upon her REFRAD to complete her MSO, which should have been 8 years
after she entered the ROTC program was carefully considered.   However,
there is insufficient evidence to support this claim.  By law and
regulation, the 8-year MSO is incurred on initial entry into the Armed
Forces whether by induction, enlistment, or appointment.

2.  The evidence of record confirms the applicant initially enlisted in the
USAR on 17 December 1992.  She reenlisted in the USAR on 5 December 1994,
for the purpose of entering the Army ROTC program as a cadet.  Her ROTC
contract obligated her to serve on active duty for two, three, or four
years and to complete the remainder of her 8-year MSO in a RC if necessary.
 In this case, the applicant's MSO would have been incurred upon her
initial enlistment in the USAR on 17 December 1992, which would have
established the termination date of her 8-year MSO as 16 December 2000.  As
a result, she had no further MSO on 7 January 2001, the date of her
discharge.

3.  The DD Form 214 issued to the applicant upon her discharge on 7 January
2001, clearly shows she had no further MSO in Item 6, Item 9 confirms she
was not being transferred to a RC, and Item 23 verifies she was discharged.
 She authenticated the DD Form 214 with her signature in Item 21 (Signature
of Member Being Separated) on the date of her discharge.  In effect, her
signature was her verification that the information contained on the DD
Form 214, to include the Item 6, Item 9 and Item 23 entries, was correct at
the time the separation document was prepared and issued.  Further, there
is no indication she tried to clarify her military status or that she
applied for continued service in the IRR at the time of her discharge.
Therefore, there is an insufficient evidentiary basis to support granting
the requested relief.

4.  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 this requirement.

BOARD VOTE:

________  ________  ________  GRANT FULL RELIEF

________  ________  ________  GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

___PMS _  __DKH__  __EEM__  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.




                                  _____Paul M. Smith_______
                                            CHAIRPERSON



                                    INDEX

|CASE ID                 |AR20060013131                           |
|SUFFIX                  |                                        |
|RECON                   |                                        |
|DATE BOARDED            |2007/05/01                              |
|TYPE OF DISCHARGE       |NA                                      |
|DATE OF DISCHARGE       |NA                                      |
|DISCHARGE AUTHORITY     |NA                                      |
|DISCHARGE REASON        |NA                                      |
|BOARD DECISION          |DENY                                    |
|REVIEW AUTHORITY        |Mr. Schwartz                            |
|ISSUES         1.       |102.0700                                |
|2.                      |                                        |
|3.                      |                                        |
|4.                      |                                        |
|5.                      |                                        |
|6.                      |                                        |


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