BOARD DATE: 25 February 2016 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20150008031 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 general, under honorable discharge. He also requests a personal hearing. 2. The applicant states, in effect, he is providing a new argument and new evidence that were not previously considered. 3. The applicant provides: * page 2 of a Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) letter * page 5 of VA Form 21-526 (Veteran’s Application for Compensation and/or Pension) * two letters, dated 11 February and 9 April 2015 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 Army Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR) in Docket Number AR2013007008, on 17 December 2013. 2. As a new argument, the applicant states he is a service-connected [disabled] veteran and his disabilities were the reason he was unable to complete his military tour of service. Therefore, he should not be dishonored because of it. 3. As new evidence, the applicant provides page 2 of an undated VA letter, wherein it shows he was granted service-connected disability rated at: * 20 percent (%) for left lower extremity radiculopathy, effective 4 March 2011 * 20% for right lower extremity radiculopathy, effective 4 March 2011 * 10% for lumbar degenerative joint disease, effective 4 March 2011 4. The applicant enlisted in the District of Columbia (DC) Army National Guard (DCARNG) on 28 February 1979 for a period of 6 years. His expiration of term of service (ETS) was 27 February 1985. He was assigned to the 115th Combat Support Hospital, Wash, DC. 5. On 23 April 1979, he entered active duty for training (IADT). He completed training and was awarded military occupational specialty 71L (Administrative Specialist). On 8 September 1979, he was released from IADT to the control of the DCARNG. 6. On 21 February 1980, he enlisted in the U.S. Army Reserve (USAR) (Reserve Officers' Training Corps (ROTC). On 1 May 1980, he was disenrolled from the ROTC program to the control of DCARNG for failing to maintain academic standards. 7. The complete facts and circumstances surrounding his separation processing from the DCARNG are not available for review with this case. However, his National Guard Bureau (NGB) Form 22 (Report of Separation and Record of Service) shows he was separated from the DCARNG on 1 February 1982 and transferred to the USAR Individual Ready Reserve (IRR) by reason of failure to attend drills with a general, under honorable conditions characterization of service. 8. There is no evidence in the applicant’s available record that shows he was ever treated for or diagnosed with any injury or medical condition while serving in the ARNG that rendered him unable to perform his duties. There is no evidence that shows he requested to be excused from unit assemblies due to any medical issues/problems. 9. Orders D-02-013623, dated 20 February 1985, issued by the USAR Personnel Center, discharged him from the IRR effective 27 February 1985 with a general, under honorable characterization of service. 10. Army Regulation 135-178 (ARNG and Army Reserve - Separation of Enlisted Personnel), then in effect stated a Soldier is subject to discharge for unsatisfactory participation when it is determined that the Soldier is unqualified for further military service because the Soldier is an unsatisfactory participant; attempts to have the Soldier respond or comply with orders or correspondence have resulted in the Soldier's refusal to comply with orders or correspondence; a notice sent by certified mail was refused, unclaimed, or otherwise undeliverable; or verification that the Soldier has failed to notify the command of a change of address and reasonable attempts to contact the Soldier have failed. Characterization of service normally will be under other than honorable conditions, unless characterization as general under honorable conditions is warranted. 11. Army Regulation 135-178 also provided that a Soldier transferred to the IRR for unsatisfactory participation prior to 1 December 1982, with a characterization of service of less than fully honorable normally would be discharged at the expiration of his or her mandatory service obligation (MSO) with that same characterization of service. However, he or she may earn a higher characterization by rejoining the same or another ARNG or USAR unit and participating satisfactorily for the remainder of his or her MSO, but for not less than 12 months. He or she may also volunteer for and serve satisfactorily on a tour of at least 45 days of ADT. 12. National Guard Regulation 600-200 (Enlisted Personnel Management) sets the policies, standards, and procedures for the separation of enlisted Soldiers from the ARNG. The approval authority to separate Soldiers from the State ARNG is the State Adjutant General. Soldiers who have a remaining statutory or contractual military service obligation (MSO) will be transferred or reassigned to the IRR to complete their statutory or contractual MSO, whichever expires later. 13. National Guard Regulation 600-200, chapter 6, provides that an honorable discharge is a separation with honor and entitles the recipient to benefits provided by law. The honorable characterization is appropriate when the quality of the member's service generally has met the standards of acceptable conduct and performance of duty for Army personnel or is otherwise so meritorious that any other characterization would be clearly inappropriate 14. Title 38, U.S. Code, sections 1110 and 1131, permit the VA to award compensation for disabilities which were incurred in or aggravated by active military service. The VA, which has neither the authority, nor the responsibility for determining physical fitness for military service, awards disability ratings to veterans for conditions that it determines were incurred during military service and subsequently affect the individual's civilian employability. The VA awards disability ratings to veterans for service-connected conditions, including those conditions detected after discharge, to compensate the individual for loss of civilian employability. 15. Army Regulation 15-185 (ABCMR) states ABCMR members will review all applications that are properly before them to determine the existence of an error or injustice; direct or recommend changes in military records to correct the error or injustice, if persuaded that material error or injustice exists and that sufficient evidence exists on the record; recommend a hearing when appropriate in the interest of justice; or deny applications when the alleged error or injustice is not adequately supported by the evidence and when a hearing is not deemed proper. The ABCMR will decide cases on the evidence of record; it is not an investigative body. The ABCMR may, at its discretion, hold a hearing. Applicants do not have a right to a hearing before the ABCMR. The Director of the ABCMR may grant a formal hearing whenever justice requires. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS: 1. The applicant's request for a personal appearance hearing was carefully considered. However, by regulation, an applicant is not entitled to a hearing before the ABCMR. Hearings may be authorized by a panel of the ABCMR or by the Director of the ABCMR. In this case, the evidence of record is sufficient to render a fair and equitable decision at this time. As a result, a personal appearance hearing is not necessary to serve the interest of equity and justice in this case. 2. The applicant's available record is void of the specific facts and circumstances surrounding his separation processing from the DCARNG. However, his NGB Form 22 confirms he was separated from the ARNG for failure to attend drills with a general discharge and transferred to the IRR. In the absence of evidence to the contrary, it is presumed what the ARNG did in his case was appropriate and his general discharge properly reflects his service in the ARNG. 3. In compliance with governing regulation, he was discharged from the IRR on 27 February 1985 with a general discharge. There was no error or injustice. 4. His record is void of any evidence, and he did not provide any evidence, that shows he was diagnosed with any injury or medical condition while serving in the ARNG that rendered him unable to perform his duties. The fact the VA granted him service-connected disability is noted; however, the disability rating was effective 4 March 2011, almost 30 years after his separation from the ARNG and does not reflect his condition at the time of his service in the ARNG. 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 AR20130007008, dated 17 December 2013. _______ _ 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) AR20150008031 3 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 1 ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20150008031 5 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 1