IN THE CASE OF:	  

		BOARD DATE:  17 September 2013

		DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20130000768 


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 an upgrade of his discharge under other than honorable conditions from the U.S. Army Reserve (USAR) to a general discharge under honorable conditions.

2.  The applicant states it is his absolute goal to complete his career with the military.  Not only does he want to serve his country, but he wants to feel secure enough for his wife and children.  He wants them to see that one must always keep pressing forward even with all the obstacles one faces.  He was discharged due to lack of transportation.  Unfortunately, he was having financial issues and could not afford to purchase a vehicle or repair his former one.  He had no alternate plan for transportation.  He exhausted all avenues, including public transportation and asking members of other units to carpool.  In time he has been able to secure employment and reestablish himself.  As a result, he was able to purchase a reliable vehicle.  Moreover, he has made a huge life transition; he has gotten married and now has two children.  Ultimately, he gained more purpose and wants to be able to fulfill his military duties.  Even though he had trouble that was outside of his control during the beginning of his military career, he refuses to let it deter him from his purpose.  Being in the military isn't just a career to him; it is an honor, a responsibility, a challenge, and most of all a commitment.  He would like his discharge upgraded so he can fulfill his commitment to his country and to those who served before and fought to keep us free.

3.  He provides no additional evidence.

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  The applicant's records contain a DD Form 4 (Enlistment/Reenlistment Document – Armed Forces of the United States) which shows he enlisted in the USAR for a period of 8 years on 12 May 2009.

2.  His records also contain a Certificate and Acknowledgment – USAR Service Requirements and Methods of Fulfillment rendered at the time of his enlistment.  This form explained his military obligation, the methods of fulfilling that obligation, and participation requirements.  In connection with his enlistment in the USAR, he acknowledged that he incurred a statutory military service obligation and a contractual obligation to serve 6 years as an assigned member of a troop program unit (TPU) in the Selected Reserve (SELRES) and 2 years as an assigned member of the Individual Ready Reserve (IRR) unless he voluntarily elected to remain assigned and continue to satisfactorily participate as a member of a TPU.  He also acknowledged his understanding that if he failed to participate satisfactorily for any of the reasons specified in his contract, he would be subject to separation from the SELRES or IRR, as appropriate, either by reassignment or discharge, which could result in a pay grade reduction and an other than honorable characterization of his military service.

3.  His records contain a DD Form 214 which shows he served on active duty for training from 3 March 2010 through 6 August 2010 for attendance at basic combat and advanced individual training (AIT).  Upon completion of AIT, he was awarded military occupational specialty 31E (Corrections Specialist).

4.  The complete facts and circumstances leading to the applicant's discharge are not available for review with this case.  However, his records contain Orders 11-214-00011, Headquarters, 99th Regional Support Command, Fort Dix, NJ, dated 2 August 2011, which show he was reduced in rank/grade from private first class/E-3 to private/E-1 and discharged under other than honorable conditions effective 9 August 2011.

5.  On 23 March 2012, he submitted a request for an upgrade of his discharge to the Army Discharge Review Board (ADRB).  The ADRB Case Report and Directive shows the complete facts and circumstances leading to the applicant's discharge from the USAR were not contained in his available records at the time. 
However, the documents submitted by the applicant showed his unit commander notified him on 21 December 2010 of initiation of separation action under the provisions of Army Regulation 135-178 (Army National Guard and Army Reserve – Separation of Enlisted Personnel), paragraph 13-1, for unsatisfactory participation for failing to attend 9 or more unit training assemblies within a 
12-month period and/or failing to report for annual training as ordered during the same 12-month period, with a recommendation that his service be characterized as general under honorable conditions.  He was advised of his rights.  The ADRB Case Report and Directive also noted that the applicant submitted an Election of Rights/Acknowledgment of Receipt for Separation Proceedings and Request for Conditional Waiver under Chapter 13, Army Regulation 135-178, showing he waived his right to consult with legal counsel, was advised of the impact of the discharge action, and did not submit a statement in his own behalf.

6.  On 24 October 2012, the President of the ADRB informed the applicant that after careful review of his application, military records, and all other available evidence, the ADRB determined he was properly and equitably discharged.  Accordingly, his request for a change in the character of and/or reason for his discharge was denied.

7.  Army Regulation 135-178 sets forth policies, standards, and procedures to ensure the readiness and competency of the U.S. Army while providing for the orderly administrative separation of Army National Guard and USAR enlisted Soldiers for a variety of reasons, to include the Soldier's refusal to comply with orders or correspondence and unsatisfactory participation in scheduled unit training.  Characterization of service normally will be under other than honorable conditions.

8.  Army Regulation 135-178 states an honorable characterization of service is appropriate when the quality of the Soldier's service generally meets the standards of acceptable conduct and performance of duty for military personnel or is otherwise so meritorious that any other characterization would be clearly inappropriate.  A general discharge is warranted when significant negative aspects of the Soldier's conduct or performance outweigh positive aspects of the Soldier's military record.

9.  Army Regulation 135-178 states that if a Soldier's service has been honest and faithful, it is appropriate to characterize that service as under honorable conditions.  Characterization of service as general under honorable conditions is warranted when significant negative aspects of the Soldier's conduct or performance of duty outweigh positive aspects of the Soldier's military record.  When authorized, a characterization of under honorable conditions is awarded to a Soldier whose military record is satisfactory but not sufficiently meritorious to warrant an honorable discharge.


DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant's records show he was discharged under other than honorable conditions by reason of continued absence from scheduled unit training assemblies and annual training.

2.  As a member of the USAR, the applicant was required to attend all scheduled unit training assemblies, multiple unit training assemblies, and annual training periods.  The evidence shows he did not do so and he admits he did not attend training due to the lack of transportation.  The fact that he was unable to travel to scheduled training is regrettable.  However, there is no evidence of record and he did not provide any evidence that shows he sought help resolving this situation or requested any kind of assistance from his chain of command.

3.  It appears that the applicant's service did not meet the standards of acceptable conduct and performance of duty for USAR personnel based on his failure to attend scheduled unit training assemblies.  This misconduct rendered his service as unsatisfactory.  Therefore, he is not entitled to an upgrade his discharge.

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

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 the overall merits of this case are insufficient as a basis for correction of the records of the individual concerned.



      _________________________
                 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)                                         AR20130000768



3


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20130000768



4


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1