APPLICANT REQUESTS: That her military records be corrected to show her grade as E-5.
APPLICANT STATES: That on 13 September 1991 she joined the USAR for training in military occupational specialty (MOS) 91C (practical nurse). She contends that her recruiter told her that to enter 91C training she would have to be reduced to grade E-4 (she was discharged from the active Army as an E-5) and she has since learned that this was untrue. Additionally, she was unable to obtain a 91C training seat and consequently left the active USAR for the Individual Ready Reserve (IRR) on 27 November 1992. She believes that since the 91C training she enlisted for did not take place as intended she should have her previous grade of E-5 restored.
EVIDENCE OF RECORD: The applicant's military records show:
She enlisted in the Regular Army on 12 July 1979 and received training as an interrogator. She was eventually promoted to grade E-5 and was honorably separated in that grade on 11 April 1984.
On 13 September 1991 she enlisted for 6 years in the USAR for training in MOS 91C and was assigned against a projected vacancy in the 810th Convalescent Center.
Her enlistment contract shows that that her authorized enlistment pay grade was E-4 as determined in accordance with Army Regulation 601-210, table 3-4, rule E. It provided also that she was required to attend a period of civilian training followed by 4 weeks of active duty proficiency training prior to award of the MOS for which she enlisted.
On 9 August 1992 the applicant was issued a letter by her unit commander advising her that she had accrued 4 unexcused absences from training. She received other unexcused absence letters on 27 September 1992 and 11 October 1992 resulting in a total of 12 unexcused absences in a 1 year period. On 26 October 1992 she was advised that she had been declared an unsatisfactory and would be transferred to the IRR for the balance of her service obligation.
The file contains no evidence that she ever responded to any of the unexcused absence letters although each of the letters invites an explanation of the reason for the absence from the recipient.
On 27 November 1992 she was removed from the 810th Convalescent Center rolls and transferred to the IRR as an unsatisfactory participant.
Army Regulation 601-210, Regular Army and Army Reserve Enlistment Program, table 3-4, then in effect, provides rules for determining the enlistment pay grade for prior active service personnel who are enlisting in the USAR. Rule D provides that an applicant who was a former Army enlisted member who enlists in the USAR more than 30 months after discharge will be enlisted at least one grade lower than at last discharge, but no lower than E-3.
Rule E of the same table, provides that former members of the Navy, Air Force, Marine Corps, or Coast Guard who enlist more than 30 months after discharge will be enlisted at least one grade lower but no more than three grades lower than at last discharge, but no lower than E-3.
Army Regulation 135-91, Service Obligations, Methods of Fulfillment, Participation Requirements, and Enforcement Procedures, provides in pertinent part, that a soldier is an unsatisfactory participant when nine or more unexcused absences from scheduled drills occur during a 1-year period.
DISCUSSION: Considering all the evidence, allegations, and information presented by the applicant, together with the evidence of record, applicable law and regulations, it is concluded:
1. The applicant was enlisted in the USAR on 13 September 1991 in the proper grade of E-4. Although her enlistment contract incorrectly cite table 3-4, rule E, as the authority for her grade determination, (it should have cited table 3-4, rule D), there was no adverse impact on her since both rules require a one grade reduction for soldiers who enlist in the USAR after more than 30 months since their last separation.
2. The available record do not reflect the reasons why she did not attend the initial training for her 91C MOS, but do show that after being assigned to the unit for less than 1 year she began to accumulate unexcused absences that culminated in her being declared an unsatisfactory participant. Since the record does not contain any replies to the unexcused absence letters, it is not possible to ascertain the reasons for her noncompliance with unit training requirements.
3. The actions by the Army in this case appear to have been proper, and there is no doubt to be resolved in favor of the applicant.
4. In view of the foregoing, there appears to be no basis for granting the applicants request.
DETERMINATION: The applicant has failed to submit sufficient relevant evidence to demonstrate the existence of probable error or injustice.
BOARD VOTE:
GRANT
GRANT FORMAL HEARING
DENY APPLICATION
Karl F. Schneider
Acting Director
ARMY | BCMR | CY1995 | 9510016C070209
APPLICANT STATES: In effect, that she was activated to serve in Operation Desert Storm; that, while serving with the 892d Transportation (Trans) Company (Co) in Saudia Arabia, she became pregnant and was sent home; that she received a letter, dated 24 July 1991, stating that she was reassigned to the 657th Trans Co, with her first drill date as 3 August 1991; that she attended the August, September, and October drills; that, during the month of November, she started to experience...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2003 | 2003089787C070403
The applicant states, in effect, that she enlisted in the United States Army Reserve (USAR) on 16 November 1987 for a period of 8 years under the Student Loan Repayment Program (SLRP). A review of the applicant's records shows no indication that the applicant was ever notified that she was being transferred to the IRR due to unsatisfactory participation. Therefore, the Board finds that it would be in the interest of justice to correct her records to show that as an exception to policy, she...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2013 | 20130022322
Her DA Form 2-1 (Personnel Qualification Record) shows she was promoted to PFC/E-3 in the USAR on 10 January 1985. The applicant enlisted in the ARNG on 15 February 1990 in the rank/grade of SPC/E-4. After having accumulated over 16 unexcused absences, her chain of command declared her an unsatisfactory participant and reduced her to PFC/E-3 for inefficiency.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100029609
The applicant requests, through her Member of Congress, the removal of the inactive time from 7 March 1994 to 31 August 1999 from her records. Army Regulation 135-175 (Separation of Officers) provides for the separation of officers of the Army National Guard of the United States and the U.S. Army Reserve, except for officers serving on active duty or active duty for training exceeding 90 days. The evidence of record, during the period 11 September 1993 through 7 November 1993, shows she...
ARMY | BCMR | CY1996 | 9605182C070209
Consequently, she submitted her request for reclassification from the MOS of a personnel management specialist (75C) to MOS 91C. DISCUSSION: Considering all the evidence, allegations, and information presented by the applicant, together with the evidence of record, applicable law and regulations, and advisory opinion, it is concluded: 1. The applicant was properly enlisted in the pay grade of E-3 in MOS 75C at the time of her enlistment.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080014308
The applicant requests, in effect, that his reduction Orders Number 004-001, dated 22 April 1994, and his reassignment Orders Numbers 025-008, for unsatisfactory participation, dated 10 May 1994, be removed from his OMPF (Official Military Personnel File). The applicant's military records show he enlisted in the U. S. Army Reserve (USAR) on 19 February 1992, for 8 years. Army Regulation 140-158 prescribes policies and procedures pertaining to the classification, promotion, reduction, and...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002075494C070403
In accordance with Army Regulation 15-185, the application and the available military records pertinent to the corrective action requested were reviewed to determine whether to authorize a formal hearing, recommend that the records be corrected without a formal hearing, or to deny the application without a formal hearing if it is determined that insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate the existence of probable material error or injustice. The board recommended that...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140009225
The ARCAM is awarded for every 4 years of honorable USAR service. (2) Effective 28 March 1995, the period of qualifying service for award of the ARCAM is reduced from 4 to 3 years. c. There is no evidence of record and he did not provide sufficient evidence showing he was authorized or awarded the ARCAM during his period of service in the USAR.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140016414
Army Regulation 135-91 (ARNG and USAR Service Obligations, Methods of Fulfillment, Participation Requirements, and Enforcement Procedures), states a Soldier is an unsatisfactory participant when 9 or more unexcused absences from scheduled inactive duty training occur during a 1-year period. Army Regulation 135-178, in effect at the time, provided for the separation of enlisted personnel of the USAR and ARNG. The applicant's record shows she was discharged by reason of continued absence...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2001 | 2001060807C070421
On 17 January 1991, the 3/200 ADA battalion commander sent to the applicant at his Loveland, Colorado, address, a AGONM Form 20-12-11B.2 (Record of Special Proceeding of Non-Judicial Punishment – Absence from Unit Training Assembly, Drill, or Annual Training), notifying the applicant of the commander’s intent to impose an Article 15, Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ), punishment of reduction in grade as a result of his 16 unexcused absences from unit drill from September through...