RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


      IN THE CASE OF:


      BOARD DATE:        18 April 2006
      DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20050012772


      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. Robert L. Duecaster           |     |Chairperson          |
|     |Mr. Robert Rogers                 |     |Member               |
|     |Mr. John g. Heck                  |     |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 records be corrected to
show she reenlisted in January 2005 for a Selective Reenlistment Bonus
(SRB).

2.  The applicant states, in effect, she was given erroneous information
regarding her reenlistment window.

3.  The applicant provides a handout provided during a retention conference
conducted in February 2005; emails dated 6 August 2004, 19 May 2005, 31 May
2005, 18 August 2005, and 30 September 2005; a Soldier Management System
printout; reenlistment orders dated 6 April 2000; a Retirement Points
Summary printout; Military Personnel (MILPER) Message 04-353, subject:
Implementation of Selective Reenlistment Bonus (SRB) for U. S. Army Reserve
(USAR) Active Guard Reserve (AGR) Soldiers, issued 29 December 2004; and a
request for reenlistment dated 11 January 2005.

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  After having had prior service (with a pay entry basic date of 11 April
1989), the applicant enlisted in the USAR on 5 July 1997.  She entered
active duty in an AGR status on an unknown date.  On 9 February 2000, she
reenlisted in the USAR for 6 years, in military occupational specialty
(MOS) 92Y, with an expiration term of service (ETS) of 8 February 2006.
She was promoted to Sergeant First Class (SFC), E-7 on 1 October 2002.

2.  Headquarters, Department of the Army, Deputy Chief of Staff for
Personnel, G-1 message, date time group 061104Z August 2004, changed Army
Regulation 140-111 (U. S. Army Reserve Reenlistment Program) to expand the
reenlistment eligibility period for continued USAR membership upon entry,
retention, or separation from active duty in an AGR status from within 3
months to within       12 months.

3.  MILPER Message 04-353, issued 29 December 2004, authorized an SRB for
USAR AGR Soldiers in MOS 92Y.  To be eligible for the SRB, a Soldier must
have been serving within his or her first 16 years of active service, must
have reenlisted in the AGR program for at least 3 years, and must have been
serving on AGR duty in the rank of Sergeant, E-5 through SFC.  Only the
numbers of additionally obligated years or fractions of years remaining
until the Soldier would reach 18 years of active service could be used to
compute the SRB benefit.  A "reenlistment window" was not mentioned as an
eligibility requirement.

4.  On 11 January 2005, the applicant requested reenlistment for an
indefinite period.  Her commander recommended approval on 11 January 2005.

5.  A 19 May 2005 email from the applicant's brigade retention liaison
indicated the applicant's request to reenlist was disapproved because she
was not within a 90-day window of her ETS.

6.  On 11 April 2005, the applicant reached her 16th year of service.

7.  On 6 January 2006, the applicant extended her 6-year reenlistment of
        9 February 2000 for 3 months, making her new ETS 8 May 2006.

8.  In the processing of this case, an advisory opinion was obtained from
the Army Reserve Active Duty Management Directorate, U. S. Army Human
Resources Command – St. Louis.  That office recommended approval of the
applicant's request.  That office noted the applicant failed to reenlist
before reaching her 16 years of active service on 11 April 2005 because she
was erroneously told she could only reenlist within a 90-day window of her
ETS to qualify for the SRB. (That office later explained to the Board
analyst that, because the SRB message did not reference the 12-month window
(or any window) of reenlistment eligibility, they reenlisted Soldiers
without regard to a window of eligibility.)

9.  A copy of the advisory opinion was provided to the applicant for
comment.  On 3 April 2006, she concurred with the advisory opinion.  She
reiterated that she requested her reenlistment be backdated to January
2005.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  In accordance with an August 2004 change to the reenlistment
regulation, the applicant should have been eligible to reenlist on 9
February 2005, when she reached her 12-month window of reenlistment
eligibility.

2.  When the December 2004 SRB message came out, it failed to mention there
was a reenlistment window of eligibility (whether 12 months or a lesser
period).

3.  The applicant submitted her request for an indefinite reenlistment on
         11 January 2005, before she reached 16 years of active service,
making her eligible to receive the SRB in accordance with the December 2004
SRB message.  However, she was erroneously informed she had to wait until
she reached a 90-day window of eligibility (around November 2005, after she
would have completed 16 years of active service).

4.  In accordance with the advisory opinion and the explanation given to
the Board analyst concerning the 12-month window of eligibility, it would
be equitable to correct the applicant's records to show she reenlisted on
11 January 2005 for an indefinite period and received the SRB as outlined
in MILPER Message      04-353 issued on 29 December 2004.

BOARD VOTE:

__rld___  __rr____  __jgh___  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:

     a.  showing she was authorized an antedated reenlistment to reenlist
in January 2005 outside of the 12-month window of eligibility as an
exception to policy;

     b.  voiding her extension of 6 January 2006; and

     c.  showing she reenlisted on 11 January 2005 for an indefinite period
with entitlement to receive the SRB as outlined in MILPER Message 04-353
issued on 29 December 2004.




                                  __Robert L. Duecaster_
                                            CHAIRPERSON



                                    INDEX

|CASE ID                 |AR20050012772                           |
|SUFFIX                  |                                        |
|RECON                   |                                        |
|DATE BOARDED            |20060418                                |
|TYPE OF DISCHARGE       |                                        |
|DATE OF DISCHARGE       |                                        |
|DISCHARGE AUTHORITY     |                                        |
|DISCHARGE REASON        |                                        |
|BOARD DECISION          |GRANT                                   |
|REVIEW AUTHORITY        |Mr. Schneider                           |
|ISSUES         1.       |112.05                                  |
|2.                      |                                        |
|3.                      |                                        |
|4.                      |                                        |
|5.                      |                                        |
|6.                      |                                        |


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