IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 23 February 2023 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20220008526 APPLICANT REQUESTS: The Board to, in effect, correct his DA Form 5016 (Chronological Statement of Retirement Points) to show he accumulated a minimum of 50 retirement points for Retirement Year 20160113 to 20170112 APPLICANT'S SUPPORTING DOCUMENT(S) CONSIDERED BY THE BOARD: * Online DD Form 149 (Application for Correction of Military Record) * Email correspondence for dates between 8 April to 4 June 2016 * Two MP Company MFR pertaining to Battle Assembly dates * Regional Support Command (RSC) promotion orders * DA Form 5016 FACTS: 1. The applicant did not file within the 3-year time frame provided in Title 10, United States Code (USC), section 1552 (b) (Correction of Military Records: Claims Incident Thereto). However, the Army Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR) conducted a substantive review of this case and determined it is in the interest of justice to excuse the applicant's failure to timely file. 2. The applicant states he had a "bad year" for Fiscal Year 2016, in that he accrued only 45 of the required 50 points; he maintains that having insufficient retirement points was not his fault, and it resulted from an "administration mishap." a. In 2015, while the applicant was deployed, his Regional Support Command promoted him to sergeant (SGT)/E-5; unbeknownst to the applicant, the command assigned him to some unit that did not reflect his promotion, and it took from the date of his redeployment, in December 2015, until May 2016 to resolve the matter. b. After the command corrected the applicant's unit of assignment, he encountered other complications that caused him to miss drill dates. He reached out to his unit numerous times, over the phone and in person, but he was unable to figure things out; they told him it would all be taken care of, but that never happened. It was not until he came to his current assignment that he was led in the correct direction. c. The applicant offered additional details in an MFR, stating in effect: (1) In August 2015, the RSC's SGT promotion orders listed his new Unit Identification Code (UIC) as; however, when the stateside command processed his orders, they entered the wrong UIC:. (2) Upon the applicant's return from deployment, he reported to as directed, but the unit said they were not tracking his promotion, and he was not on their UMR (Unit Manning Report). From 30 January 2016, following his redeployment and release from active duty, until May 2016, the applicant had no idea he had been erroneously assigned to. (3) On or about 26 May 2016, the applicant's actual UIC assignment was finally corrected. The next scheduled Battle Assembly was 4 to 5 June 2016; the applicant lived about 150 miles from his unit, and due to the short notice of the correction, his new unit was unable to secure lodging-in-kind for the applicant, so he did not attend the June 2016 Battle Assembly. (4) The unit had its Annual Training scheduled in July 2016; because he was a "new Soldier," and he had just returned from a deployment during that Fiscal Year, the unit said he did not need to attend Annual Training, so he did not go. (5) From August 2016 forward, and until his promotion to staff sergeant, the applicant attended every Battle Assembly and Annual Training conducted by the unit. Unfortunately, the mix-up caused him to miss training that would have provided him, at a minimum, the 50 points he needed for a qualifying retirement year. 3. The applicant provides documents from his official military personnel file, which include his SGT promotion orders and his DA Form 5016. He also submits email correspondence reflecting his efforts to resolve his unit assignment issue and MFRs listing the unit's battle assembly schedules. a. The email correspondence shows the applicant's efforts to connect with UIC (344th MP Company). After providing copies of his DD Form 214 and promotion orders, the 344th MP Company welcomed him, on 26 May 2016, and advised him his platoon was located in Middletown, Connecticut. b. The training schedule MFRs show the following: * 4 to 5 June 2016 – the 344th MP Company in Middletown conducted "METL /ECT" Preparation * 8 July 2016 – the unit performed "ECT PREP" * 9 to 23 July 2016 – the 344th went to Fort McCoy, WI for "ECT/WAREX" * 24 July 2016 – the 344th had "ECT RECOVERY" * 12 to 13 November 2016 – the 344th performed "L&O/METL/SRP/APFT" 4. A review of the applicant's service records show: a. On 13 January 2011, the applicant enlisted into the U.S. Army Reserve (USAR) for 8 years; (13 January 2011 became the applicant's anniversary date for retirement points purposes). Upon completion of initial entry training and the award of military occupational specialty 31B(Military Police), the Army honorably released the applicant from active duty and returned him to his USAR Troop Program Unit (TPU). b. On 2 January 2012, orders, authorized under Title 10, USC, section 12302 (Ready Reserve), called the applicant to active duty in support of Operation Enduring Freedom; he reported to Fort Bliss, TX. On 3 February 2012, the applicant deployed to Kyrgyzstan/Afghanistan; on 26 October 2012, he redeployed to Fort Bliss, where, on 3 December 2012, orders honorably released him from active duty and returned him to his TPU. c. On 10 April 2015, Title 10, USC, section 12302 orders mobilized the applicant from his TPU (88th MP Company, Fort Eustis, VA) to Fort Bliss; on 22 May 2015, based on Fort Bliss Temporary Change of Station (TCS) orders, the applicant deployed to Guantanamo Bay, Cuba. d. Effective 1 August 2015, RSC orders promoted the applicant to SGT; the orders specified that, by accepting the promotion, the applicant understood he had to report for duty, in the position to which promoted, and he would additionally need to comply with reassignment orders (if issued) and serve at least 12 months in the assigned duty position for UIC (UIC for the 344th MP Company). e. On 17 December 2015, the applicant redeployed from Guantanamo Bay and returned to Fort Bliss; on 30 January 2016, orders honorably released the applicant from active duty and directed him to return to his Fort Eustis TPU. The applicant's Enlisted Record Brief reflects a subsequent reassignment to the 304th MP Company (). f. On 26 May 2016, the applicant received an email from the 344th MP Company, welcoming him to the unit and advising him his platoon's location was in Middletown, Connecticut. The unit training schedules showed the next Battle Assembly occurred 4 and 5 June 2016, followed by annual training at Fort McCoy, from 9 to 23 July 2016. g. On 10 February 2018, the applicant immediately reenlisted for 3 years and later extended his enlistment; he is currently in an active status and serving in a TPU. h. On 8 November 2022, the U.S. Army Reserve Command (USARC) provided an advisory opinion. USARC acknowledged the applicant had encountered obstacles while trying to participate in Battle Assemblies, but he ultimately failed to earn the necessary points for a qualifying year towards retirement. USARC suggested that, if the applicant had additional documents that would allow additional points to be awarded, he should provide them to the U.S. Army Human Resources Command. i. On 7 December 2022, the Army Review Boards Agency forwarded the USARC advisory to the applicant for his review and comment; the applicant did not respond. 5. Army Regulation (AR) 140-185 (Training and Retirement Point Credits and Unit Level Strength Accounting Records), in effect at the time, prescribed the types of training and activities for which retirement points could be earned. a. Paragraph 1-7 (Service Requirement for a Satisfactory Year of Service for Non- Regular Retirement) stated a qualifying year of service for non-regular retired pay was a full year during which a Reserve Component member was credited with a minimum of 50 retirement points. b. Paragraph 1-8 (Establishment of Anniversary Year). Crediting full-year periods had to be based on anniversary years; anniversary year periods were calculated from an anniversary date, which was the date the Soldier entered active service or active status in the Reserve Component. c. Paragraph 2-1 (Criteria for Crediting Retirement Points). No more than one retirement point could be awarded for any day in which the Soldier was on active duty. A maximum of two retirement points were awarded in 1 calendar day for any activity or combination of activities. Inactive duty training was either 4 hours in length for one retirement point, or 8 hours in length for two retirement points. Reserve Component Soldiers also received 15 membership points for each year in an active status. d. Paragraph 2-2 (Criteria for Earning Retirement Points). USAR Soldiers earned points for active duty service, active duty for training, annual training, and inactive duty training (IDT). The following types of IDT were authorized: * Regularly scheduled unit training assemblies (i.e., battle assemblies) * Rescheduled or make-up assemblies * Additional training assemblies * Training of individual Soldiers in a non-pay status e. Paragraph 2-4 (Criteria for Awarding Retirement Points) described four sets of rules: * Four-hour rule – Soldiers earned one point for each scheduled 4-hour period of IDT at battle assembly, rescheduled training, equivalent training, or additional training assemblies * Two-hour rule – Soldiers earned one point for each IDT period per day while performing funeral honors; the maximum was one point per calendar day * Four/eight-hour rule – Soldiers could earn one point for each 4 hour or greater period; a second point was awarded when that additional time totaled 8 hours; the maximum was two points per calendar day * Eight-hour rule – Approved electronic-based distributed learning (EBDL) courses were awarded to TPU members, subject to available funding and with pre-approval; Soldiers could earn one retirement point and be paid for one IDT for every 8 hours of distance learning completed BOARD DISCUSSION: After reviewing the application and all supporting documents, the Board determined relief was not warranted. The applicant’s contentions, the military record, and regulatory guidance were carefully considered. Based upon the available documentation, the facts outlined in the USARC advisory opinion and the lack of any rebuttal submitted by the applicant, the Board concluded there was insufficient evidence of an error or injustice warranting a change to the applicant’s DA Form 5016. BOARD VOTE: Mbr 1 Mbr 2 Mbr 3 : : : 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. 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. REFERENCES: 1. Title 10, USC, section 1552(b), provides that applications for correction of military records must be filed within 3 years after discovery of the alleged error or injustice. This provision of law also allows the ABCMR to excuse an applicant's failure to timely file within the 3-year statute of limitations if the ABCMR determines it would be in the interest of justice to do so. 2. AR 140-185, in effect at the time, prescribed the types of training and activities for which retirement points could be earned. a. Paragraph 1-7 (Service Requirement for a Satisfactory Year of Service for Non- Regular Retirement) stated a qualifying year of service for non-regular retired pay was a full year during which a Reserve Component member was credited with a minimum of 50 retirement points. b. Paragraph 1-8 (Establishment of Anniversary Year). Crediting full-year periods had to be based on anniversary years; anniversary year periods were calculated from an anniversary date, which was the date the Soldier entered active service or active status in the Reserve Component. c. Paragraph 2-1 (Criteria for Crediting Retirement Points). No more than one retirement point could be awarded for any day in which the Soldier was on active duty. A maximum of two retirement points were awarded in 1 calendar day for any activity or combination of activities. Inactive duty training was either 4 hours in length for one retirement point, or 8 hours in length for two retirement points. Reserve Component Soldiers also received 15 membership points for each year in an active status. d. Paragraph 2-2 (Criteria for Earning Retirement Points). USAR Soldiers earned points for active duty service, active duty for training, annual training, and inactive duty training (IDT). The following types of IDT were authorized: * Regularly scheduled unit training assemblies (i.e., battle assemblies) * Rescheduled or make-up assemblies * Additional training assemblies * Training of individual Soldiers in a non-pay status e. Paragraph 2-4 (Criteria for Awarding Retirement Points) described four sets of rules: * Four-hour rule – Soldiers earned one point for each scheduled 4-hour period of IDT at battle assembly, rescheduled training, equivalent training, or additional training assemblies * Two-hour rule – Soldiers earned one point for each IDT period per day while performing funeral honors; the maximum was one point per calendar day * Four/eight-hour rule – Soldiers could earn one point for each 4 hour or greater period; a second point was awarded when that additional time totaled 8 hours; the maximum was two points per calendar day * Eight-hour rule – Approved electronic-based distributed learning (EBDL) courses were awarded to TPU members, subject to available funding and with pre-approval; Soldiers could earn one retirement point and be paid for one IDT for every 8 hours of distance learning completed //NOTHING FOLLOWS// ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20220008526 1 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 1