PROCEEDINGS

	IN THE CASE OF:  

	BOARD DATE:           14 November 2000
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR2000045291
				   AR2000043694		

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

	Mr. Carl W. S. Chun		Director	
	Ms. Wanda L. Waller		Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Ms. Shirley Powell		Chairperson	
	Ms. Meta Waller		Member	
	Mr. Terry L. Placek		Member	

	The applicant and counsel if any, did not appear before the Board.

	The Board considered the following evidence:

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

FINDINGS:

1.  The applicant has exhausted or the Board has waived the requirement for exhaustion of all administrative remedies afforded by existing law or regulations.

2.  The applicant requests that his first and middle names be corrected on his separation orders, dated 1 July 1999, from the USAR.  He also requests that the reason shown on his reassignment orders, dated 10 May 1995, be changed to “Non-break-in-service” instead of “Unsatisfactory Participation”. 

3.  The applicant submitted one DD Form 149 (Application for Correction of Military Records) and one DD Form 293 (Application for the Review of Discharge or Dismissal from the Armed Forces of the United States).  The DD Form 293 was accepted by the Army Board for Correction of Military Records because the Army Discharge Review Board is not empowered to review the issue raised by the applicant.  

4.  In his application, the applicant states, in effect, that his first and middle names are in reverse order on the separation orders dated 1 July 1999.  In support of his application, he submits a copy of an Indiana Identification Card, a copy of a Marion County Health Department Record and a copy of his Social Security Card. 

5.  In his DD Form 293, the applicant states, in effect, that he requested a unit transfer in December 1993.  He contends that after several unsuccessful attempts to obtain transfer orders, he decided to let time take its course and wait for a response.  He states that he was notified of the unit change when he received the “Unsatisfactory Participation” order dated 10 May 1995.  In support of this application, he submits a two-page attachment; a copy of Orders 133-010 dated 10 May 1995; a copy of Orders 143-07 dated 27 August 1994; a copy of Orders C-12-650337 dated 17 December 1996 and a letter from the Review Boards Agency dated 8 June 2000.           

6.  The applicant’s military records show that he enlisted in the USAR on 20 June 1991 for a period of 8 years.  He entered active duty for training on 10 July 1991 and was released from active duty on 9 November 1991 and transferred to the USAR to complete his remaining obligation.   

7.  The applicant’s separation orders (Orders 182-8), dated 1 July 1999, show his first name as “Tyrone” and his middle name as “Eric”.

8.  Item 1 (Name) on the applicant’s DD Form 4/1 (Enlistment/Reenlistment Document), dated 20 June 1991, shows his first name as “Eric” and his middle name as “Tyrone”.

9.  Item 1 (Name) on the applicant’s DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) with an effective date of 9 November 1991 shows his first name as “Eric” and his middle name as “Tyrone”.

10.  The applicant provided copies of an Indiana Identification Card, a copy of a Marion County Health Department Record and his Social Security Card which show his first name as “Eric” and his middle name as “Tyrone”. 

11.  The applicant’s records contain orders, dated 27 August 1994, which show the applicant was reassigned to Fort Wayne, Indiana, due to a change of residence.  There is no evidence in the applicant’s records which shows that he attended scheduled drills following his reassignment.   
 
12.  The applicant’s records contain orders 133-010, dated 10 May 1995, which show the applicant was reassigned to USAR Control Group (Reinforcement) effective 10 May 1995, for unsatisfactory participation.      

13.  The applicant was honorably discharged from the USAR on 1 July 1999. 

14.  Army Regulation 135-91 (Service Obligations, Methods of Fulfillment, Participation Requirements, and Enforcement Procedures) defines Army National Guard and USAR service obligations.  Section III (Unexcused Absences) states that soldiers will be charged with unsatisfactory participation when without proper authority they accrue in any 1 year period, a total of nine or more unexcused absences from scheduled drills; fail to obtain a unit of assignment during a leave of absence, granted per section IV; or fail to attend or complete annual training.  Officers and enlisted soldiers with the exception of ROTC Simultaneous Membership Program cadets will be processed for reassignment or separation.

15.  Army Regulation 140-10 (Assignments, Attachments, Details, and Transfers) provides for the policy and procedures for assigning, attaching, removing, and transferring USAR soldiers.  Chapter 4 of the regulation provides for the Individual Ready Reserve.  Paragraph 4-15 (Involuntary Reassignment for Unsatisfactory Participation) of this regulation states that a Troop Program Unit or Individual Mobilization Augmentee soldier who has completed initial entry training and has been awarded a military occupational specialty and is not within 3 months of expiration term of service, who fails to participate satisfactorily per Army Regulation 135-91, chapter 4, section III, may be reassigned to the appropriate control group of the IRR.  Involuntary reassignment is discretionary and may be made in lieu of discharge proceedings per Army Regulation 135-178, chapter 13, when determined to be in the best interest of the Army.  Commanders will not take reassignment action under this paragraph solely to spare a soldier from administrative separation proceedings for other than unsatisfactory participation per Army Regulation 135-178. 

CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant’s first and middle names were incorrectly entered on his separation orders from the USAR.  Therefore, the applicant’s separation orders should be corrected at this time.

2.  The Board noted the applicant’s request to change the reason shown on his reassignment orders, dated 10 May 1995, to “Non-break-in-service” instead of “Unsatisfactory Participation”.  However, there is no evidence of record available to the Board, and the applicant has provided no evidence, which shows that he satisfactorily participated in scheduled drills or otherwise met his USAR service obligation following his reassignment in August 1994.  Therefore, in the absence of evidence to the contrary, the Board determined that the reason “Unsatisfactory Participation” is correct as currently constituted. 

3.  In view of the foregoing findings and conclusions, it would be appropriate to correct the applicant’s records, but only as recommended below.

RECOMMENDATION:

1.  That an official document be prepared to correct the applicant’s first and middle names on his separation orders from the USAR dated 1 July 1999.

2.  That so much of the application as is in excess of the foregoing be denied.

BOARD VOTE:  

SP_____  MW_____  TLP_____  GRANT AS STATED IN RECOMMENDATION

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

________  ________  ________  DENY APPLICATION

		        Shirley Powell_
		        CHAIRPERSON

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2000045291
AR2000043694	
SUFFIX		
RECON		
DATE BOARDED	20001114	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE	(HD)	
DATE OF DISCHARGE	19990701	
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY	  	
DISCHARGE REASON		
BOARD DECISION	(GRANT)	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.	100.0100	
2.	110.0200	
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.