Search Decisions

Decision Text

ARMY | BCMR | CY2012 | 20120021586
Original file (20120021586.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

		IN THE CASE OF:	  

		BOARD DATE:  25 June 2013

		DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20120021586 


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, that his 1 June 2004 U.S. Army Reserve (USAR) discharge orders be revoked and that he be transferred to the Retired Reserve.

2.  The applicant states he did not know he was discharged from the USAR.  He did not have information on the discharge.

3.  The applicant provides: 

* DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty)
* Photograph of a military identification card
* Notification of Eligibility for Retired Pay at Age 60 (20-Year Letter)
* Army Reserve Personnel Command (ARPC) Form 249-E (Chronological Statement of Retirement Points)
* Orders D-06-419231 (discharging him from the USAR)

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.  The applicant was born on XX March 1956.

3.  Having had prior enlisted service in the Regular Army (February 1977 to February 1981), the applicant enlisted in the USAR on 21 April 1983.  He served through multiple extensions or reenlistments in a variety of assignments and he attained the rank/grade of sergeant first class (SFC)/E-7.  

4.  On 18 December 1996, the USAR Personnel Center - St. Louis issued him a 20-Year Letter.  This letter notified the applicant that he had completed the required years of service and he would be eligible for retired pay upon application at age 60.

5.  On 5 December 2000, he executed a 3-year reenlistment in the USAR.  He reenlisted for the option of a transfer to the USAR Control Group (Reinforcement). 

6.  On 30 January 2001, Headquarters, 99th Regional Support Command, Oakdale, PA published Orders 01-030-028 reassigning him from his troop program unit (TPU) to the USAR Control Group (Reinforcement), effective 7 January 2001. 

7.  On 6 March 2001, the USAR Personnel Command - St. Louis published Orders C-03-106041 transferring him from the USAR Control Group (Reinforcement) to a TPU by reason of his voluntary request. 

8.  He entered active duty on 10 December 2001 in support of Operation Enduring Freedom.  He was honorably released from active duty on 5 November 2003 and he was transferred to the USAR Control Group (Reinforcement).  

9.  The applicant's records do not show that he requested a transfer to the Retired Reserve.  Likewise, his records do not show he reenlisted in the USAR. 

10.  On 1 June 2004, the U.S. Army Human Resources Command (HRC) - St. Louis published Orders D-05-419231, honorably discharging the applicant from the USAR, effective 1 June 2004, by reason of expiration of his term of service.

11.  An advisory opinion was obtained on 7 February 2013 from HRC in the processing of this case.  An advisory official stated that the applicant was a mobilized individual mobilization augmentation Soldier who was released from active duty on 1 June 2004.  He was discharged two months later due to ETS. 

12.  The applicant was provided a copy of this advisory opinion but he did not respond within the time allowed.

13.  Army Regulation 140-10 sets forth the basic authority for the assignment, attachment, detail, and transfer of USAR Soldiers.  Chapter 7 of the regulation relates to the removal of Soldiers from an active status and states in pertinent part that Soldiers removed from an active status will be discharged or, if qualified and if they so request, will be transferred to the Retired Reserve.  

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant served in the USAR, through multiple reenlistments, from September 1981 to June 2004.  After his mobilization in December 2001 and subsequent release from active duty in November 2003, he neither reenlisted in the USAR nor requested a transfer to the Retired Reserve.  Accordingly, he was honorably discharged from the USAR due to ETS.  

2.  There is no evidence in the available records and he provides none to show he requested a transfer to the Retired Reserve.  He does not provide corroborating evidence of his contention that he did not know he had to request a transfer to the Retired Reserve.

3.  The applicant was a senior noncommissioned officer.  He knew, or should have known, that a transfer to the Retired Reserve is not automatic and must be requested.  He did not do that.  He did not question his discharge status for nearly 9 years.  There is no evidence in the available records and the applicant did not provide substantiating evidence to show he requested transfer to the Retired Reserve.  Therefore, there is insufficient evidence to grant him 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)                                         AR20120021586





3


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20120021586



2


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

Similar Decisions

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2007 | 20070009807

    Original file (20070009807.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 18 August 2004, the applicant wrote to HRC-St. Louis and requested a transfer to the IRR from the Retired Reserves so he could return as a drilling/active member of the 35th Signal Battalion (USAR). Army Regulation 15-185 (Army Board for Correction of Military Records) prescribes the policies and procedures for correction of military records by the Secretary of the Army, acting through the ABCMR. The request for transfer to a TPU from the USAR Control Group (Reinforcement) did not...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2003 | 2003089482C070403

    Original file (2003089482C070403.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The physician nor her command recommended the applicant for a Medical Evaluation Board (MEB) or any form of physical disability processing. A waiver of nonparticipation may be granted only on a one-time basis for failure to earn the required 50 points during a retirement year. There is no evidence in the applicant’s record to show that she requested a one-time waiver of her removal based on her circumstances at the time.

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080013024

    Original file (20080013024.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant requests, in effect, award of the Army Reserve Components Achievement Medal (ARCAM) (2nd Award). The medal is also awarded to USAR Soldiers serving as Individual Mobilization Augmentee (IMA) after completing qualifying service and on recommendation of the unit commander or Headquarters, Department of the Army (HQDA) official to which the IMA is assigned. The evidence of record shows that the applicant was recommended for award of the ARCAM for the period 11 December 1992 to...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | 20110010927

    Original file (20110010927.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    There is no record of a reenlistment or extension subsequent to 17 June 2000 and no record that separation/discharge orders were published to effect his discharge on 17 June 2000. These orders stated that he would remain subject to the Reserve Component unit stop loss policy for 90 days after his release from active duty date. The evidence of record supports the applicant's claim that he was subject to Stop Loss and held on active duty past his ETS.

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080008772

    Original file (20080008772.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Army Regulation 135-155 also states, in pertinent part, that an active duty officer, who is selected for promotion but removed from the ADL and placed in an active Reserve status prior to promotion, is not eligible for that promotion and that officer will be placed on the RASL and considered for promotion by a Reserve promotion board. With respect to the applicant's consideration for promotion to LTC by a Special Selection Board, there is no evidence in the applicant’s records and the...

  • 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 | 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 | CY2002 | 2002071739C070403

    Original file (2002071739C070403.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The WOMT denied this request because the RDMS indicated that the applicant was assigned to the Retired Reserve as a LTC. In its earlier consideration of this case, the Board concluded that due to numerous errors in dates in the appointment process and transfers among the RC between June 1996 and February 1999, the applicant was effectively prevented from completing his RC warrant officer training requirements within the prescribed period, which by regulation was three years. The Board in...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080016121

    Original file (20080016121.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant requests, in effect, that his records be corrected to show that he was transferred to the U.S. Army Reserve (USAR) Control Group (Retired) effective 11 July 1992 and that he be credited with the appropriate retirement points from that date. Counsel requests, in effect, that the applicant be granted retirement points credit for service in the IRR until his retirement. However, the applicant's original request of 16 May 1990 is filed in his official records and it very clearly...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2007 | 20070006869

    Original file (20070006869.TXT) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant requests, in effect, that her records be corrected to show she is entitled to a 15-year non-regular retirement based on her medical disqualification from the United States Army Reserve (USAR). On 19 September 2006, HRC, St. Louis, Missouri, informed the applicant by memorandum that the PEB determined that she was unfit for duty and that she was permanently disqualified and must be separated from the USAR. On 18 October 2006, HRC St. Louis, Missouri, published Orders Number...