Search Decisions

Decision Text

ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002068538C070402
Original file (2002068538C070402.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied
MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION


         IN THE CASE OF:
        


         BOARD DATE: 1 August 2002
         DOCKET NUMBER: AR2002068538

         I certify that hereinafter is recorded the record of consideration of the Army Board for Correction of Military Records in the case of the above-named individual.

Mr. Carl W. S. Chun Director
Ms. Joyce A. Wright Analyst


The following members, a quorum, were present:

Mr. Samuel A. Crumpler Chairperson
Mr. Melvin H. Meyer Member
Ms. Regan K. Smith Member

         The Board, established pursuant to authority contained in 10 U.S.C. 1552, convened at the call of the Chairperson on the above date. 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 applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein.

         The Board considered the following evidence:

         Exhibit A - Application for correction of military
records
         Exhibit B - Military Personnel Records (including
         advisory opinion, if any)


APPLICANT REQUESTS: That Headquarters, 121st United States Army Reserve Command Orders 134-19, dated 18 December 1987, be removed from his Service (S) Fiche, Service Computation Data Section, of his Official Military Personnel File (OMPF) or be revoked.

APPLICANT STATES: That his unit, the 3343rd USA Hospital in Mobile, Alabama, was performing annual training in San Antonio, Texas where he decided to reside. He located a unit in Texas, within his time frame, and drilled with his new unit. He later returned to his unit with no lost time in meeting his yearly drills. In support of his application, he submits a copy of his reassignment orders, dated 18 December 1987, and letter from a former service member (FSM), now retired.

EVIDENCE OF RECORD: The applicant's military records show he enlisted in the USAR on 3 June 1980. He was ordered to active duty (AD) on 4 September 1980 and released from AD on 17 December 1980. He was trained as a food service specialist. He was transferred to the 3343rd Hospital, Mobile, Alabama, a troop program unit (TPU). On 1 April 1986, the applicant reenlisted for 6 years in the Army Reserve.

The applicant was ordered to AD for annual training (AT) for the period 23 August to 9 September 1987, with duty at Fort Sam Houston, Texas.

The applicant provided a copy of Headquarters, 121st US Army Reserve Command Orders 134-19, dated 18 December 1987. This order shows that the applicant was released from the 3343rd USA Hospital in Mobile, Alabama and was assigned to the USAR Control Group (Reinforcement), effective 18 December 1987. This order also shows that the reason for transfer was unsatisfactory participation.

He continued to serve in the Control Group until he was honorably released on 10 December 1991, in order to enlist in the District of Columbia Army National Guard (DCARNG). He was honorably discharged from the DCARNG on 17 August 1992. He was transferred to the USAR Control Group (IRR).

The applicant’s retirement points accounting summary shows credit for drill of 11 points, credit for AT of 15 points, and credit for membership of 15 points, for a total of 41 points for retirement year ending 3 June 1987 to 2 June 1988.

There is no record of transfer, drill or assignment of the applicant to a unit in San Antonio, Texas.




The applicant provided a copy of a letter from a FSM, dated 6 February 2002. The FSM stated that he and the applicant were assigned to the 3343rd USA Hospital and were stationed at Fort Sam Houston in San Antonio, Texas for AT. The applicant was present and attending AT and decided to remain in San Antonio to the best of his knowledge. He joined a unit in San Antonio; however, he is unable to recall how long the applicant resided in San Antonio. The applicant returned to Mobile, Alabama and to his parent unit. The applicant had a good and satisfactory record while assigned to the 3343rd USA Hospital and he continued to give advice to him on remaining in the USAR. The FSM concluded by stating the orders transferring the applicant were in error and unjust.

Army Regulation 140-10, in effect at the time, set forth the basic authority for the assignment, attachment, detail, and transfer of USAR soldiers. Chapter 4 of the regulation governs transfer to the Individual Ready Reserve (IRR). Section I pertains to unsatisfactory participants. It states, in pertinent part, that TPU enlisted members who fail to satisfactorily participate may be transferred to the IRR, or to a control group to complete their statutory or contractual military service obligation (MSO). Transfer will be without board action or characterization of service.

Army Regulation 135-91 (Policies and Procedures Governing Satisfactory Participation) prescribes policies, procedures, and responsibilities pertaining to satisfactory completion of the Ready Reserve service obligation and enforcement procedures pertaining thereto for certain personnel of the Reserve Components. Section III pertains to unexcused absence. Paragraph 4-9 pertains to conditions of unexcused absence. It states, in pertinent part, that enlisted members who are obligated by statue or contract will be charged with unsatisfactory participation when without proper authority they: (1) accrue in any 1-year period, a total of nine or more excuse absences from schedules drills; (2) fail to obtain a unit of assignment during a leave of absence; and (3) fail to attend or complete AT. Statutorily or contractually obligated enlisted members who are charged with unsatisfactory participation may be transferred to the IRR.

Paragraph 4-16 of the same regulation pertains to notice of relocation. It states that a notice of intended relocation should be sent to the unit commander in writing as far in advance of departure as possible. The notice should include the new address (if known) and evidence that a relocation of residence is in fact to be made. Army National Guard (ARNG) and USAR members who give notice of relocation will be reassigned to the area of their new address. Members who fail to give notice of relocation and members who cannot be reassigned will be given a 90-day leave of absence letter.



Paragraph 4-17 pertains to procedures. It states that on receipt of a notice of planned relocation for USAR members, the unit commander will contact the major US Army Reserve Command for assignment in the new location through the automated unit vacancy system (AUVS). A leave of absence of 90-days will be granted to USAR members.

Army Regulation 600-8-104 (Military Personnel Information Management/
Records) prescribes the policies governing the Official Military Personnel File, the Military Personnel Records Jacket, the Career Management Individual File, and Army Personnel Qualification Records. Paragraph 2-4 of this regulation states that once a document is placed in the Official Military Personnel File it becomes a permanent part of that file and will not be removed from that file or moved to another part of the file unless directed by the proper authorities listed in the regulation.

Table 2 of the regulation pertains to the composition of the OMPF. It states, in pertinent part, that orders transferring members among Army Reserve Components, control groups, or units will be filed on the S Fiche, Service Computation Data Section.

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 Board notes his contention that Headquarters, 121st US Army Reserve Command Orders 134-19, dated 18 December 1987, should be removed or revoked. The Board also notes that the applicant has not shown that any error or injustice existed in filing of his orders, which transferred him to the Control Group.

2. The evidence of record does not show that when the applicant was performing AT in San Antonio, Texas, he decided to remain and located a unit in Texas within his time frame, and drilled with his new unit.

3. The Board notes that in accordance with regulation, the notice of intended relocation should be sent to the unit commander in writing as far in advance of departure as possible. The notice should include the new address and evidence that a relocation of residence is in fact to be made. The Board also notes that USAR members who give notice of relocation will be reassigned to the area of their new address and members who fail to give notice of relocation and members who cannot be reassigned will be given a 90-day leave of absence letter.



4. The applicant has failed to provide this Board with evidence to show that he obtained a unit of assignment in writing during his absence. The applicant was charged with unsatisfactory participation and was transferred to the IRR in accordance with pertinent regulations.

5. The Board concludes that the applicant’s contested orders reassigning to the
Control Group is properly filed on the S fiche of his OMPF in accordance with applicable regulations.

6. 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.

7. In view of the foregoing, there is no basis for granting the applicant's 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

__sc___ ___mm___ __rs__ DENY APPLICATION




                  Carl W. S. Chun
                  Director, Army Board for Correction
of Military Records




INDEX

CASE ID AR2002068538
SUFFIX
RECON
DATE BOARDED 20020801
TYPE OF DISCHARGE (HD, GD, UOTHC, UD, BCD, DD, UNCHAR)
DATE OF DISCHARGE YYYYMMDD
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY AR . USAR . . . .
DISCHARGE REASON
BOARD DECISION DENY
REVIEW AUTHORITY
ISSUES 1. 1021
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.


Similar Decisions

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2013 | 20130005634

    Original file (20130005634.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Evidence of record shows that prior to his deployment to Iraq he relocated to New York. The applicant has not provided evidence that shows he requested transfer to the IRR due to his relocation to Georgia. There is no evidence of error in his record of unexcused absences.

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2003 | 2003089787C070403

    Original file (2003089787C070403.rtf) Auto-classification: Approved

    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 | CY2006 | 20060007478

    Original file (20060007478.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant states, in effect, that following her relocation to Georgia in 2001 she attempted to get a different TPU (Troop Program Unit) assignment but was unable to do so. All of the correspondence and orders issued during this period list her rank as a SGT and was sent to addresses in Mississippi. Army Regulation 140-10 (Assignments, Attachments, Details, and Transfers), paragraph 4-15 (Involuntary reassignment for unsatisfactory participation) states that a TPU Soldier who has...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090017764

    Original file (20090017764.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    However, only the following was included with his application: * 25 January 2003 enlistment contract * 4 statements associated with his chain of command supporting a request to amend his reassignment orders to permit no break in TPU assignments * Statement from the 98th Training Division Command Career Counselor * Orders transferring him to the USAR Control Group effective 30 April 2007 * Orders transferring him from the USAR Control Group with a TPU effective 1 May 2007 CONSIDERATION OF...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100019633

    Original file (20100019633.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant requests the removal of memoranda, dated 29 January 1993 and 1 March 1994, from his records that show he was non-selected for promotion to captain (CPT) twice. On 24 February 1992, his immediate commander initiated a request to separate him in accordance with paragraph 2-12 of Army Regulation 135-175 (Separation of Officers). On 1 March 1994, by memorandum also addressed to the applicant at his Birmingham, AL address, HRC-STL again notified him that he was considered for...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2001 | 2001060807C070421

    Original file (2001060807C070421.rtf) Auto-classification: Approved

    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...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100029609

    Original file (20100029609.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 | CY2007 | 20070010331

    Original file (20070010331.TXT) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant provides the following additional documentary evidence in support of her application: a. DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty), dated 31 December 1992. b. U.S. Total Army Personnel Command (now known as HRC), St. Louis, Missouri, Memorandum, dated 31 December 1992, appointing her as a Reserve commissioned officer. e. Page 1 of Standard Form 93 (Report of Medical History), dated 26 October 2000. f. Headquarters, 75th Division (Training Support),...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2007 | 20070017956

    Original file (20070017956.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Item 4a (Grade, Rate, or Rank) of the applicant’s DD Form 214, dated 2 September 1988, shows that on the date of his release from active duty for training he held the grade of PV2. Army Regulation 15-185, is the regulation that governs the operation of the Board, sets forth the procedures for processing requests to correct military records and states, in pertinent part, that the Army Board for Correction of Military Records begins its consideration of each case with the presumption of...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090002660

    Original file (20090002660.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    The applicant requests that his DD Form 214 (Armed Forces of the United States Report of Transfer or Discharge) be corrected to show proof of his promotion to sergeant/pay grade E-5, all of his medals and awards, his U.S. Army Reserve (USAR) units, and his units in the Republic of Vietnam. On 14 July 1988, the commander of the 341st Medical Group, Seagoville, TX, returned the applicant's request to his unit commander stating the request was incomplete and required a separate letter from the...