IN THE CASE OF:	

		BOARD DATE:	    5 February 2014

		DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20130009725 


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 reconsideration of his previous request for an upgrade of his 2005 Army National Guard (ARNG) under other than honorable conditions discharge to an honorable discharge.  

2.  The applicant states:

   a.  He would like to finish a career he loves so much.  He believes the record to be in error because of the misunderstanding between him and his commanders.  He was never told of the requirement to return to his unit if he did not enter on active duty.  He cleared the unit and even received an award from the Department of the Army.  Upon learning of this mistake he has been trying to clear this matter up.  

   b.  On 17 May 2002, he went to talk to Major (MAJ) Jxxx W. Fxxxxxx about being released from his unit in order to return to active duty.  He advised MAJ Fxxxxxx that his wife had been diagnosed with cancer and he could not afford all of the medical bills and needed help.  MAJ Fxxxxxx reviewed his wife's medical papers and granted his release from the unit.

   c.  His wife ended up taking a turn for the worse and 90 percent of his time was spent at the hospital.  He was out of the local area due to her cancer treatments in hospitals out of state.  Every dime he had went toward medical bills.  They had to file for bankruptcy.  He lost his home, vehicles, and other properties.  He was trying to return to active duty, but due to these uncontrollable circumstances in his life he missed some drills.  He is not sure of how many drills he missed, but he knows he missed some.

   d.  He no longer has any of these obstacles in his way and wishes to devote himself once again to the career that he has always wanted.  He wishes to better not only himself, but his family as well, with all of the benefits of a military career, including job security and pride which comes from a dedicated military career.

   e.  He has finished all phases of processing into the military and he is ready to go.  He is attaching his current USMEPCOM Form 680-3A-E (Request for Examination) and Automatic Data Processing (ADP) Aptitude Data Results.  It has taken him 5 years and writing letters to Members of Congress just to get his status changed to be eligible for reenlistment.  There is nothing standing in his way; he can give 110 percent without a problem.

3.  The applicant provides copies of the following:

* 1989 and 1998 DD Forms 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty)
* 1998 DD Form 214 Worksheet
* National Guard Bureau (NGB) Form 22 (Report of Separation and Record of Service)
* 2012 Army Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR) Record of Proceedings 
* NGB Form 22A (Correction to NGB Form 22)
* 2013 Enlistment Policy Changes email
* 2013 Reenlistment Eligibility Data Display (REDD) Request Data
* 2013 USMEPCOM Form 680-3A-E and ADP Results 
* 2013 DD Form 1966/1 (Record of Military Processing – Armed Forces of the United States)
* 2013 DD Form 2807-1 (Report of Medical History)
* 2013 DD Form 2807-2 (Medical Prescreen of Medical History Report)
* 2013 DD Form 2808 (Report of Medical Examination) pages 2 and 3
* 2013 DD Form 2808-2 (Medical Prescreen of Medical History Report)
* 2013 Security Clearance Application
* Three character reference letters
* His birth certificate, social security card, and driver license

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  Incorporated herein by reference are military records which were summarized in the previous consideration of the applicant's case by the ABCMR in Docket Number AR20110022910 on 23 May 2012.

2.  The applicant submitted copies of his 2013 reenlistment documents and three character reference letters.  There are considered new evidence and will be considered by the Board.

3.  The applicant enlisted in the Regular Army (RA) on 5 March 1987.  He completed training and was awarded military occupational specialty (MOS) 11C (indirect fire infantryman).  He was honorably released from active duty in pay grade E-4 on 11 April 1989 and was transferred to the U.S. Army Reserve Control Group (Reinforcement).  He was credited with completion of 2 years, 1 month, and 7 days of net active service with no time lost.  

4.  He again reenlisted in the RA on 31 January 1993.  He held MOS 13B (cannon crewmember).  He was honorably discharged from active duty in pay grade E-4 on 6 November 1998, by reason of a hardship discharge.  He was credited with completion of 5 years, 9 months, and 6 days of net active service with no time lost.  

5.  He enlisted in the Washington ARNG (WAARNG) on 21 March 2001.  He held MOS 13B.

6.  Between 6 November 2004 and 6 February 2005, he accrued in excess of 12 unexcused absences from unit training assemblies on 6-7 November 2004,
8-9 January 2005, and 4-6 February 2005.

7.  On 14 February 2005, the applicant's unit commander notified the applicant of his intent to initiate action to separate him under the provisions of Army Regulation 135-178 (Enlisted Administrative Separation), chapter 13, for Unsatisfactory Participation.  He advised the applicant of the requirement to complete the enclosed election of rights within 30 days of date of receipt of the notification.

8.  On 14 February 2005, the unit personnel administrator completed an affidavit confirming he mailed the applicant's separation notice to the applicant's last known address and the applicant did not respond.

9.  On 25 April 2005, the separation authority approved the applicant's discharge and directed the issuance of an under other than honorable conditions discharge and reduction to pay grade E-1.

10.  Accordingly, he was discharged in pay grade E-1 on 9 May 2005 from the WAARNG, under the provisions of National Guard Regulation 600-200 (Enlisted Personnel Management), paragraph 8-27f, for Unsatisfactory Participation.  He was credited with completion of 4 years, 1 month, and 19 days of net service.  His NGB Form 22 lists a reentry code (RE) of RE-4.
11.  On 20 November 2009, the Army Discharge Review Board denied his request for an upgrade of his discharge.

12.  In 2012, based on the recommendation of the ABCMR an NGB Form 22A was issued correcting his 2005 NGB Form 22 to list an RE code of RE-3.

13.  He provided copies of the following:

   a.  An Enlistment Policy Changes email, dated 1 February 2013, pertaining to changes regarding to the reentry age for prior service members.

   b.  A 2013 USMEPCOM Form 680-3A-E and ADP Results, DD Form 1966/1, DD Form 2807-1, DD Form 2807-2, DD Form 2808 (pages 2 and 3), Security Clearance Application, he completed and submitted to the Seattle Military Entrance Processing Station for reenlistment.

   c.  Three character reference letters, dated 15, 16, and 17 April 2013, wherein the individuals attested that the applicant was an upstanding, outstanding, and honest  citizen and a person of very good moral character. 

   d.  His birth certificate, social security card, and driver license.

14.  Army Regulation 135-178, in effect at the time, set forth the administrative separation of ARNG and Army Reserve Soldiers.  The regulation stated in:

   a.  Paragraph 2-9a – an honorable characterization was appropriate when the quality of the Soldier’s service generally had met the standards of acceptable conduct and performance of duty for Army personnel, or was otherwise so meritorious that any other characterization would be clearly inappropriate.  An honorable characterization could only be awarded a soldier upon completion of his or her service obligation.

   b.  Paragraph 2-9b – a general discharge was awarded to a Soldier whose military record is satisfactory but not sufficiently meritorious to warrant an honorable discharge.

   c.  Chapter 13 - a Soldier was subject to discharge for unsatisfactory participation when nine or more unexcused absences from scheduled drills occur during a 1 year period.  A characterization of service normally would be Under Other Than Honorable Conditions, but characterization as general (under honorable conditions) could be warranted.

15.  National Guard Regulation 600-200 establishes policies and procedures for the management of ARNG enlisted Soldier.  The regulation states in:
   a.  Paragraph 6-34 - RE code assignment is based on reason and authority for discharge.  

   b.  Paragraph 6-35j - refer to Army Regulation 135-178, chapter 13, for unsatisfactory participation.  Commanders may recommend retention of Soldiers who have accrued nine or more unexcused absences within a one-year period.  Soldiers must be notified by registered or certified mail the intent and projected discharge date.  For members separated as an unsatisfactory participant the RE code of RE-3 (waivable) will be assigned.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The evidence of record shows the applicant, as a member of the WAARNG, accrued in excess of 12 unexecuted absences in less than 1 year.  He failed to respond to repeated efforts to contact him.  The separation authority approved his discharge and he was separated accordingly on 9 May 2005.  By his own admission he states he missed some drills; however, he failed to submit sufficient evidence showing he was erroneously or unjustly prevented from completing his term of service.

2.  His contentions and the documents he provided were carefully considered.  He did not provide sufficient evidence or a convincing argument to show his discharge should be upgraded and his military records contain no evidence which would entitle him to an upgrade of his discharge to a general or a fully honorable discharge.

3.  Without evidence to the contrary, it appears his administrative separation was accomplished in compliance with applicable regulations with no procedural errors which would tend to jeopardize his rights.  He was properly discharged in accordance with pertinent regulations with due process.  Therefore, he is not entitled to an honorable discharge.

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 to amend the decision of the ABCMR set forth in Docket Number AR20110022910, dated 23 May 2012.




      _______ _  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)                                         AR20130009725



3


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20130009725

   
2


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1