Search Decisions

Decision Text

ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090021642
Original file (20090021642.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

		IN THE CASE OF:	  

		BOARD DATE:	  15 June 2010

		DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20090021642 


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 correction of his records to show he was discharged from the Mississippi Army National Guard (MSARNG) in the rank/grade of sergeant (SGT)/E-5 instead of specialist four (SP4)/E-4 and correction of his qualifying years for non-regular retirement to include all of his U.S. Army Reserve (USAR) and ARNG service.

2.  The applicant states he was promoted to SGT/E-5 while assigned to the 223rd Engineer Battalion.  He also states that "they" did not count all his USAR and ARNG service.

3.  The applicant did not provide any additional documentary evidence.

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.  Having had prior service in the Regular Army, the applicant's records show he enlisted in the Virginia ARNG in the rank/grade of SP4/E-4 on 3 January 1983.  He held military occupational specialties (MOS) 11B (Infantryman) and 73C (Finance Specialist).  He was honorably discharged on 2 January 1986.

3.  He then enlisted in the MSARNG in the rank/grade of SP4/E-4 on 3 January 1986 and held MOS 75B (Personnel Administration Specialist).  He was assigned to the 223rd Engineer Battalion, Clarksdale, MS.  He also extended his enlistment in the ARNG by 6 years on 14 December 1987 and he was promoted to SGT/E-5 on 25 January 1988.

4.  On 14 and 15 May 1988, his immediate commander reported him in an absent without leave (AWOL) status for having missed roll call, and on 22 May 1988, he was again reported in an AWOL status for having missed a scheduled unit training assembly (UTA) or multiple unit training assemblies (MUTAs).

5.  On 5 June 1988, by certified/registered mail, his immediate commander notified him that he was absent from the scheduled UTA/MUTA on 14, 15, and 22 May 1988 respectively.  He also notified him that he had accrued six unexcused absences and that an accumulation of nine unexcused absences within 1 year would declare him an unsatisfactory participant.  He was also provided an opportunity to explain and/or provide justification for the unexcused periods.  The certified mail receipt shows he received delivery and accepted receipt of this letter but he failed to respond.

6.  On 9 July 1988, he submitted a hand-written letter wherein he requested to be discharged from the MSARNG because he had completed Tractor-Trailer-Truck training and he planned to seek civilian employment that would take him cross-country and that the ARNG was holding him back.

7.  On 10 July 1988, by memorandum through the chain of command to the MSARNG, his immediate commander requested that the applicant be discharged from the MSARNG.  The commander stated he had spoke with the applicant and his civilian employment conflicted with his ARNG service.

8.  On 1 and 5 October 1988, by certified/registered mail, his immediate commander notified him that he was absent from the scheduled UTA/MUTA on 18 September and 1 and 2 October 1988 respectively.  The applicant was also notified that he had accrued ten unexcused absences and that an accumulation of nine unexcused absences within 1 year would declare him an unsatisfactory participant.  He was also provided an opportunity to explain and/or provide justification for the unexcused periods.  The certified mail receipt shows he received delivery/accepted receipt but he failed to respond.
9.  On 18 January 1989, Headquarters, 223rd Engineer Battalion, published Orders 1-4 reducing the applicant from SGT/E-5 to SP4/E-4 for inefficiency, effective 9 January 1989 with a date of rank of 13 April 1982.

10.  On 4 April 1989, the Adjutant General's Office of the MSARNG published Orders 60-78 discharging him from the ARNG effective 4 April 1989 and transferred to the USAR Control Group (Reinforcement).  The orders listed his rank as SP4.

11.  He was discharged from the ARNG on 4 April 1989 with a general character of service.  His National Guard Bureau (NGB) Form 22 (Report of Separation and Record of Service) shows his rank/grade at the time of discharge as SP4/E-4 and his date of rank as 13 April 1982.

12.  He was ultimately discharged from the USAR on 6 April 1993 due to completion of his mandatory service obligation.  His discharge orders also listed his rank as SP4.

13.  Neither his his ARPC 249-E (Chronological Statement of Retirement Points) nor his NGB Form 23A (Army National Guard Current Annual Statement) is available for review with this case.

14.  There is no evidence in his records that show he was promoted between the date he was reduced to SP4/E-4 in January 1989 and the date he was discharged in April 1989.

15.  National Guard Regulation 600-200 (Enlisted Personnel Management) governs procedures covering enlisted personnel management of the ARNG.  Chapter 8 of this regulation provides for reasons for separation from the ARNG.  Paragraph 8-35j of this regulation states that individuals can be separated for unsatisfactory participation.  

16.  Army Regulation 135-91 (Service Obligations, Methods of Fulfillment, Participation Requirements, and Enforcement Procedures) provides for service obligation, methods, and participation.  It states a member is an unsatisfactory participant when nine or more unexcused absences occur during a 1-year period due to missing scheduled drills.   

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The available evidence shows the applicant was reduced from SGT/E-5 to SP4/E-4 on 9 January 1989 due to inefficiency.  He held the rank/grade of SP4/E-4 from the date of reduction until he was discharged on 4 April 1989.  There is no evidence he was promoted after 9 January 1989.

2.  With respect to correction of his qualifying years of service for a non-regular retirement, aside from the fact that neither his ARPC 249-E nor his NGB Form 23A is available for review, he is advised that correction of qualifying years of service should be addressed to the Commander, U.S. Army Human Resources Command (USAHRC), ATTN: AHRC-PSR, 1 Reserve Way, St. Louis, MO, 63132-5200.  

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)                                         AR20090021642



3


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20090021642



2


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

Similar Decisions

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2015 | 20150003309

    Original file (20150003309.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 29 July 1992, VAARNG published Orders 146-57 discharging him from the ARNG and assigning him to the U.S. Army Reserve (USAR) Control Group (Annual Training) effective 31 July 1992 by reason of being an unsatisfactory participant, in accordance with chapter 8 of National Guard Regulation (NGR) 600-200 (Enlisted Personnel Management). This regulation states that a member is an unsatisfactory participant when he or she accrues nine or more unexcused absences from scheduled drills during a...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2012 | 20120017950

    Original file (20120017950.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant requests correction of his record to show he was medically retired. On 6 May 1990, the applicant's unit commander informed him he was initiating action to separate the applicant from the ALARNG and as a reserve of the Army under the provisions of Army Regulation 135-178 (ARNG and Army Reserve - Enlisted Administrative Separations). The ABCMR is not an investigative body and decides cases based on the evidence that is presented in the military records provided and the...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100019482

    Original file (20100019482.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 9 January 1982, he completed a Statement of Understanding of Reserve Obligation and Responsibilities and indicated he understood that if he were not excused from scheduled training periods by proper authority, he would be considered absent without leave (AWOL) and charged with an unexcused absence; that if he were charged with nine unexcused absences, he would be declared an unsatisfactory participant and be considered for separation under other than honorable conditions and subject to...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090015308

    Original file (20090015308.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    The applicant requests correction of his records to show he was transferred to the Retired Reserve at age 60 in the rank/grade of staff sergeant (SSG)/E-6 instead of private (PV2)/E-2. Commanders may consider any misconduct, to include a record of unexcused absences or unsatisfactory participation, as evidence of inefficiency. The evidence of records shows the applicant held the rank/grade of SSG/E-6 from 1981 through 1989.

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080008301

    Original file (20080008301.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Items 5a (Rank) and 5b (Pay Grade) of the applicant’s National Guard Bureau (NGB) Form 22 (Report of Separation and Record of Service) shows the entries SP4 and E-4, respectively. There is no evidence in the applicant's records, and the applicant did not provide any evidence, that shows he had an out-of-State job transfer while serving in the Army National Guard. There is no evidence in the available records and the applicant did not submit any evidence that shows he was promoted again to...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090009525

    Original file (20090009525.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 30 December 1991, the applicant's immediate commander recommended approval of the applicant's separation with an under other than honorable conditions discharge. On 10 January 1992, the separation authority approved the applicant's request for discharge for the good of the service in accordance with chapter 10 of Army Regulation 635-200 and directed he receive an under other than honorable conditions discharge and be reduced the lowest enlisted grade. However, he requested an honorable...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2005 | 20050000545C070206

    Original file (20050000545C070206.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant is requesting correction of an alleged injustice which occurred on 1 January 1987, the date of his discharge. On 3 October 1986, the commander submitted a request through channels to the State Adjutant General requesting that the applicant be discharged under honorable conditions under the provisions of Army National Guard Regulation 600-200, paragraph 7-10r, for unsatisfactory participation of members. On 1 January 1987, the applicant was discharged, under...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2006 | 20060001249C070205

    Original file (20060001249C070205.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    Department of the Army, Company C, 1st Battalion, 124th Infantry Regiment General Orders Number 97-007, dated 28 April 1997, show that the applicant received another reduction in pay grade to pay grade PFC/E-3 for inefficiency. On 8 October 1999, the applicant was discharged from the ARNG and the United States Army Reserve (USAR). Unless an absence is authorized, a Soldier failing to attend a scheduled drill will be charged with an unexcused absence.

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140020048

    Original file (20140020048.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 26 January 1988, the OKARNG published Orders 19-14 discharging the applicant from the OKARNG with an under honorable conditions discharge, effective 8 February 1988 and transferring him to the USAR Control Group (IRR), in accordance with paragraph 8-27g of NGR 600-200. On 5 August 1989, Headquarters, 1st Battalion, 377th Infantry Regiment, published Orders 08-01 reducing the applicant from SP4/E-4 to private first class (PFC)/E-3 effective 5 August 1989 in accordance with Army Regulation...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2006 | 20060002123C070205

    Original file (20060002123C070205.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    He requested the applicant be separated with a general discharge. The applicant was separated from the CTARNG, in pay grade E-2, on 4 December 1985, under the provisions of National Guard Regulation (NGR) 600-200, Paragraph 7-10r and Chapter 4, Section III, Army Regulation 135- 91, Unsatisfactory Participation, with more than 9 absences without leave (AWOL). The applicant's service at the time of his discharge from the CTARNG was characterized as general.