BOARD DATE: 29 March 2018 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20160004256 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. 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. BOARD DATE: 29 March 2018 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20160004256 BOARD VOTE: Mbr 1 Mbr 2 Mbr 3 : : : GRANT FULL RELIEF : : : GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF : : : GRANT FORMAL HEARING ::x :x :x DENY APPLICATION 2 Enclosures 1. Board Determination/Recommendation 2. Evidence and Consideration BOARD DATE: 29 March 2018 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20160004256 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 correction of his records to show he was assigned to the U.S. Army Reserve (USAR) Individual Ready Reserve (IRR) effective upon his discharge from the Massachusetts Army National Guard (MAARNG). 2. The applicant states: a.  He requested transfer to the USAR IRR on numerous occasions prior to 30 September 2015 so he could reenlist in the USAR. He was in contact with a recruiter and his unit ignored all of his verbal and written requests. b.  He was non-retained via a Qualitative Review Board (QRB) and he accidently indicating he elected to transfer to the USAR Retired Reserve upon his release. c.  He immediately noticed the error and he attempted to change his request to transfer to the USAR IRR numerous times through emails, telephone calls, and face-to-face conversations with many people in the 1181st Forward Support Company. d.  His unit dragged the separation process along until he was discharged and then sent him an email indicating his request would not be changed. e.  The paper given to him for selection by the QRB was non-formal, so he felt the change should have been simple. He believes his unit failed in its responsibility to take care of the Soldier. f.  The recruiter he spoke with about reenlistment in the USAR no longer contacts him or responds to him. g.  He has lost the additional income and life insurance to benefit himself and his family. He is devastated about this outcome and lack of unit support. 3. The applicant provides: * self-authored email, dated 31 March 2015 * self-authored letter, dated 5 February 2016 * email correspondence, dated 8 September 2015 through 17 November 2015 CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE: 1. Having prior service in the ARNG, the applicant enlisted in the MAARNG on 18 December 1991. 2. On 10 October 2014 in response to his notification of QRB review, the applicant acknowledged he reviewed his Army Military Human Resource Record and indicated he desired transfer/reassignment to the Retired Reserve, if qualified, if he were not selected for retention. 3. On 6 February 2015, board members were appointed for the Fiscal Year 2015 (FY 15) Enlisted QRB. The board convened during the period 9 through 13 February 2015 to determine the selective retention of enlisted and noncommissioned officers of the MAARNG who were beyond 20 years of qualifying service for retired pay. 4. On 18 February 2015, a Report of the FY 15 Enlisted QRB results was submitted to the MAARNG Adjutant General for approval. 5. On 2 March 2015, the MAARNG Adjutant General approved the recommendations of the FY 15 Enlisted QRB. 6. On 3 March 2015, the MAARNG Adjutant General notified the applicant of his non-selection for continued unit participation. The applicant was advised he would be discharged no later than 30 September 2015, transferred to the USAR Control Group (Reinforcement) of the IRR, or to the Retired Reserve according to his selection by endorsement. 7. He provided a self-authored email to his commander, dated 31 March 2015, in which he indicated the QRB had decided not to keep him in an active drilling status and placed him in the IRR no later than 30 September 2015. Therefore, he requested transfer from the MAARNG to the IRR at the earliest moment in order to continue to serve his country. He indicated his intent was to serve in the USAR after being placed in the IRR. 8. Joint Force Headquarters, MAARNG, Orders 089-006, dated 30 March 2015, discharged him from the ARNG and assigned him to the Retired Reserve effective 30 September 2015. 9. He provided a self-authored email to Sergeant First Class N____ W. H____, dated 10 September 2015, wherein he requested forwarding of an unknown request and he indicated the IRR would make his transition from retired to active much easier. 10. MAARNG memorandum, dated 18 September 2015, subject: Notification of Eligibility for Retired Pay for Non-Regular Service (20 Years) (Reissue), notified him of his eligibility for retired pay upon application at age 60. 11. His National Guard Bureau (NGB) Form 22 (Report of Separation and Record of Service) shows in: a.  item 8b (Effective Date), 30 September 2015; and b.  item 23 (Authority and Reason), National Guard Regulation 600-200 (Enlisted Personnel Management), paragraph 6-36r – not selected for retention by a QRB (Army Regulation 135-205 (Enlisted Personnel Management), chapter 4) and the Soldier elects to be reassigned to the USAR Control Group (Reinforcement) or the Retired Reserve. 12. He provided an email from Sergeant First Class N____ W. H____, dated 17 November 2015, who advised the applicant he no longer had access to the applicant's records in the interactive Personnel Records Management System to see if his 20-year letter was uploaded and informed the applicant that his retirement determination would not be amended. 13. On 17 October 2017, the Chief, Personnel Policy Division, NGB, provided an advisory opinion in which he recommended disapproval of the applicant's request. He stated: a.  On or about 10 October 2014, the applicant endorsed the Notification of QRB Review memorandum provided to him by his unit. In doing so, he acknowledged that he had reviewed his Army Military Human Resource Record and, if not selected for retention, elected and endorsed a transfer to the Retired Reserve. b.  The QRB convened from 9 through 13 February 2015 and the State Adjutant General signed the board results on 2 March 2015. The applicant then received his notification of board results, dated 3 March 2015, and separation orders, dated 30 March 2015. c.  On 31 March 2015, the applicant sent correspondence to the Commander, 1181st Forward Support Company, requesting to be transferred to the IRR as soon as possible, implying that the board had selected him to enter the IRR. The applicant had some communications with a recruiter, but was notified after his discharge that the recruiter could no longer access his records or assist him. d.  The applicant asserts he suffered an injustice by not being permitted to change his selection of transfer after the board results were published and the selection of non-retention memorandums were distributed. However, there is no evidence to suggest this. The evidence does show his unit notified him 4 months prior to the board convening, giving him ample time to bring any issues or requests to his chain of command. Also, there is ample evidence to suggest the MAARNG conducted the board in accordance with Army Regulation 135-205, including using the applicant's notification memorandum as the source to inform him of his future placement in the military and to produce his orders. The evidence only suggests his requests for selection adjustment began after the board was complete. These requests do not indicate an extenuating circumstance that may have caused the applicant to change his preference or would have been reasonable cause for the MAARNG to amend his orders. e.  The NGB Enlisted Policy Branch concurs with the recommendation. The MAARNG coordinated on this opinion. 14. On 18 October 2017, a copy of the advisory opinion was sent to the applicant for review and for an opportunity to provide a response. 15. On 2 November 2017, he provided a response in which he stated he understood the decision by the QRB; however, he takes issue with the failure to inform a Soldier of the fact that he could have joined the USAR upon forced retirement from the ARNG. a.  He admits he originally indicated transfer to the IRR instead of Retired Reserve (presumed to mean vice versa), but not one Active Guard Reserve member informed him that he could have selected the Retired Reserve (presumed to mean IRR) and continued to serve in the USAR. b.  He could have continued to serve his country and provide for his family. It is no surprise to any member of the military that critical information concerning big decisions such as benefits and options is not shared with its members. Therefore, he requests to change his selection. c.  If his selection is not changed, he believes it is a disservice to him and other Soldiers who simply want to change a checked box. Soldiers need all the information to make career decisions and withholding this or simply not sharing options is wrong. He discovered the option via Facebook from a 30-year old Soldier who was forced to retire from the ARNG but joined the USAR. Asking why this simple change can or cannot be made is his right and future Soldiers should be educated on the ramifications of any and all decisions concerning their careers. REFERENCES: 1. Army Regulation 135-205, in effect at the time, prescribed policies and responsibilities for the QRB. The Qualitative Retention Program (QRP) ensures only the best qualified Soldiers are retained beyond 20 years of qualifying service for Non-Regular retired pay, provides career incentives, ensures an opportunity for advancement to the higher grades during the peak years of a Soldier's effectiveness, satisfies the continuing requirement for senior noncommissioned officers by the appropriate commands, and provides the command with a tool to control enlisted personnel inventory and manage career progression. The QRP is not to be used in lieu of separation or removal procedures authorized by other regulations for reasons such as unsatisfactory performance, unsatisfactory participation, failure to meet body fat standards, and so on. a.  Paragraph 2-5 provided that State Adjutants General (ARNG) and area commanders (USAR) may convene the QRB consistent with the guidance promulgated by the Chief, NGB, and Chief, Army Reserve, in accordance with this regulation during January, February, or March of any given year when the numbers and grades of enlisted Soldiers within the state or territory (ARNG), area command, or specific general officer commands subordinate to the area command (USAR), inhibit or deter the objectives of the QRP. b.  Paragraph 2-6d stated the Soldier, when notified of pending board consideration will indicate by endorsement to response memorandum the option preferred if not selected for retention. These options are as follows: (1)  reassignment (USAR), or transfer (Army National Guard of the United States (ARNGUS), to the Retired Reserve, if otherwise qualified; or (2)  reassignment (USAR), or transfer (ARNGUS), to the Control Group (Reinforcement) of the IRR. c.  Paragraph 2-17b stated Soldiers not selected for retention will be processed for transfer (ARNGUS), or reassignment (USAR), according to the option selected under paragraph 2-6d(1) and indicated by endorsement to the response memorandum. d.  Paragraph 2-18 stated a Soldier who has not been selected for retention by a QRB will be transferred (ARNGUS), or reassigned (USAR), to the Retired Reserve or to the IRR depending on the Soldier's option. A subsequent reaffiliation with, or reassignment to, a unit is prohibited. 2. 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 ABCMR begins its consideration of each case with the presumption of administrative regularity. The applicant has the burden of proving an error or injustice by a preponderance of the evidence. DISCUSSION: 1. The applicant contends he requested to be placed in the IRR so he could reenlist in the USAR numerous times prior to 30 September 2015. 2. The evidence of record shows he was notified of a pending QRB and he was afforded the opportunity to make an election in the event he was not selected for retention. On 10 October 2014, he elected transfer/reassignment to the Retired Reserve. 3. On 3 March 2015, he was notified of his non-selection for continued unit participation and advised of his discharge no later than 30 September 2015. 4. He contends it is an injustice in not permitting him to change his election after the board results were published because he was not fully informed of his options. Further, he provided an email to his commander, dated 31 March 2015 and after the approval of the QRB recommendation, requesting transfer to the IRR as soon as possible, implying the QRB had selected him for entry into the IRR. 5. A Soldier who has not been selected for retention by a QRB will be transferred or reassigned to the USAR Retired Reserve or the IRR depending on the Soldier's option. A subsequent reaffiliation with or reassignment to a unit is prohibited. 6. The advisory official states the applicant was given ample time to bring any issues or requests to his chain of command. The evidence suggests his requests for election adjustment began after the board action was complete; these requests do not indicate an extenuating circumstance that may have caused the applicant to change his preference or would have been reasonable cause for MAARNG to amend his orders. //NOTHING FOLLOWS// ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20160004256 2 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20160004256 7 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Enclosure 2