BOARD DATE: 14 October 2014 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20140013468 THE BOARD CONSIDERED THE FOLLOWING EVIDENCE: 1. Application for correction of military records (with supporting documents provided, if any). 2. Military Personnel Records and advisory opinions (if any). THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE: 1. The applicant requests, in effect, amendment of Orders 303-353, issued by Headquarters, U.S. Army 90th Regional Support Command (RSC) on 30 October 1998, to show he was transferred to another troop program unit (TPU) of the U.S. Army Reserve (USAR). In the alternative, he requests removal of the orders from his official military personnel file (OMPF). 2. The applicant states: a. In July 1998, he requested a TPU transfer to the Youngstown, OH area, due to his pending relocation to Ohio that resulted from a civilian employment promotion. b. He was told to find a unit when he arrived in Ohio; however, he did not find a unit until he was contacted by the Individual Ready Reserve (IRR) and sent to a unit in Pennsylvania. c. Orders 303-353 were supposed to transfer him to another TPU, not transfer him to the IRR for unsatisfactory participation. Having this order in his records is stopping him from joining the Active Guard Reserve (AGR) Program. d. He contacted the 263rd Quartermaster Company; however, no one could or would assist him. Every leader or administrative person said there was nothing he or she could do. He has been in the USAR since 1992 and he would like to continue his service in the AGR program when accepted. 3. The applicant provides Orders 303-353, issued by Headquarters, 90th RSC on 30 October 1998. CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE: 1. 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 also allows the Army Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR) to excuse an applicant's failure to timely file within the 3-year statute of limitations if the ABCMR determines it would be in the interest of justice to do so. While it appears the applicant did not file within the time frame provided in the statute of limitations, the ABCMR has elected to conduct a substantive review of this case and, only to the extent relief, if any, is granted, has determined it is in the interest of justice to excuse the applicant's failure to timely file. In all other respects, there are insufficient bases to waive the statute of limitations for timely filing. 2. On 26 June 1992, he enlisted in the USAR. Currently, he is serving in the rank/grade of staff sergeant/E-6. 3. His records show that in connection with his initial enlistment, he signed a DA Form 3540 (Certificate and Acknowledgment of Service Requirements for Individuals Enlisting, Reenlisting, or Transferring, into TPUs of the USAR), wherein he acknowledge by his signature that he understood the requirement for satisfactory participation in a TPU. a. He acknowledged that if he changed his residence to a location too distant to permit continued participation with his unit, he would be authorized a period of not more than 90 days of excused absence from training. During that 90-day period he must locate and join another Reserve Component unit. b. He would be responsible for keeping his commander advised of his current mailing address at which he could receive official correspondence. He would be responsible for replying to and complying with all official orders and correspondence which he might receive. c. If he failed to participate satisfactorily for any of the reasons explained to him or which could be placed into effect thereafter by proper authority, he could be declared an unsatisfactory participant and could be subject to removal action from the unit and transfer to the IRR. 4. He was reassigned from a TPU in Kansas to a TPU in New Jersey in May 1995, and he was reassigned from a TPU in New Jersey to a TPU in Texas in July 1997. 5. His Chronological Statement of Retirement Points, maintained within the Integrated Web Services database at U.S. Army Human Resources Command (HRC), show he was not credited with any service participation between July 1998 and May 1999. 6. Orders 303-353, issued by Headquarters, 90th RSC on 30 October 1998, show he was reassigned to the IRR by reason of unsatisfactory participation, effective 30 October 1998. 7. He was reassigned from the IRR to a TPU in West Virginia between November 1998 and March 2000; however, his records are void of these reassignment orders. 8. Orders 080-01, issued by Headquarters, 464th Chemical Brigade, Johnstown, PA on 20 March 2000, reassigned him from a TPU in West Virginia to a TPU in Beaver Falls, PA, effective the same date. 9. Army Regulation 600-8-104 (Army Military Human Resource Records Management) prescribes the policies and mandated operating tasks for the Army Military Human Resource Records Management Program. It states that once placed in the OMPF, a document becomes a permanent part of that file. The document will not be removed from the OMPF unless directed by competent authority. 10. Army Regulation 140-10 (Army Reserve – Assignments, Attachments, Details, and Transfers) prescribes policies, responsibilities, and procedures to assign, attach, detail, remove, or transfer USAR Soldiers. Chapter 4 states: * a Soldier may be voluntarily reassigned to the IRR when he or she has a change of address to an area beyond reasonable commuting distance of a USAR training center * a Soldier may be involuntarily reassigned to the IRR for unsatisfactory participation DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS: 1. The applicant's request for amendment of Orders 303-353, or removal of those orders from his OMPF, was carefully considered; however, the available evidence does not support his request. 2. Evidence shows he did not perform any kind of duty during the period July 1998 through May 1999, a period of nearly one year. There is no evidence in his record and he provides no evidence that shows he requested transfer to a TPU in his new work location during the period of June-October 1998, prior to his reassignment to the IRR for unsatisfactory participation. 3. Though it is not known when he was reassigned from the IRR to a TPU, the evidence does not indicate he followed the prescribed procedures to locate and request assignment to a unit at his new location in Ohio within 90 days or a similar amount of time in the fall of 1998. Further, he stated that he had transferred on previous occasions, which is supported by his record. As such, it appears he was already familiar with the process to locate and get reassigned to a new TPU upon relocation. 4. The ABCMR does not grant requests for changes to Army records solely for the purpose of potentially improving an applicant's career opportunities. Every case is individually decided based upon its merits. 5. There is no documentary evidence of error or injustice in the issuance of Orders 303-353 that reassigned him to the IRR. They are properly filed in his OMPF. The applicable regulation states documents will not be removed from the OMPF unless directed by authorized agencies. Therefore, there is an insufficient basis upon which to grant the requested relief. BOARD VOTE: ________ ________ ________ GRANT FULL RELIEF ________ ________ ________ GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF ________ ________ ________ GRANT FORMAL HEARING ___X__ ____X____ ____X____ 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. __________X______________ CHAIRPERSON I certify that herein is recorded the true and complete record of the proceedings of the Army Board for Correction of Military Records in this case. ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20140013468 3 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 1 ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20140013468 2 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 1