ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS IN THE CASE OF:  BOARD DATE:  24 October 2022 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20220005419 


APPLICANT REQUESTS:  a change to the narrative reason for separation. 

APPLICANT'S SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS CONSIDERED BY THE BOARD: 

•DD Form 149 (Application for Correction of Military Record)

•DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty)

•NGB Form 22 (Report of Separation and Record of Service)



FACTS: 

1.The applicant did not file within the three-year time frame provided in Title 10, UnitedStates Code, section 1552(b); however, the Army Board for Correction of MilitaryRecords (ABCMR) conducted a substantive review of this case and determined it is inthe interest of justice to excuse the applicant's failure to timely file.

2.The applicant states, in effect:

a.When he joined the military, it changed his life.  He became a man with pride andhonor.  There was no greater feeling he ever felt as he would when he put on his uniform.  He served his country with pride and always volunteered for extra detail.  His goal was to retire as a Soldier; however, when he was discharged it affected him dearly.  



b.At the time of his discharge, he did not know his legal rights, nor did he knowhow to appeal the decision.  He further states, his “discharge was not due to his performance because his racist in promotion his fellow white Soldiers were being promoted to higher ranks without the proper training or school, in when he reported it to his change of command he was blackball, which has caused a major stress in his life [sic].”   



c.For more than 27 years, he still loves his country and supports his fellowVeterans.  He has and continues to encourage youth in his church to join the Army.  It was the proudest moment of his life when he took his oath to serve his country.  He was wrongfully discharged and has carried this burden too long. 



3.The applicant provides:

a.DD Form 214 shows he was relieved from active duty training on 5 August 1988,



under the provisions of Army Regulation (AR) 635-200 (Personnel Separations – Enlisted Personnel), chapter 4, expiration term of service, with the character of service of uncharacterized.  He served 5 months and 4 days of net active service this period. b. NGB Form 22 shows he was discharged on 11 December 1991 for the Army National Guard of  , under the provisions of National Guard Regulation (NGR) 600-200, paragraph 8-27g, unsatisfactory participation, with a character of service of under honorable conditions.









4.A review of the applicant’s service record shows:a.He enlisted in the Army National Guard on 12 February 1988.b.Company (Co) B, 536th Forward Support Battalion (FSB),  Army NationalGuard (ARNG) memorandum, dated 18 January 1991, Subject:  Reduction Under AR 140-158, Chapter 7, informs the applicant that action was being initiated to reduce him from Private First Class (PFC)/E-3 to Private 2 (PV2)/E-2.  This memorandum was mailed via Certified Mail to the applicant.  The reasons for the proposed action are:   



•Inefficiency due to number of unexcused absences

•Inefficiency due to unsatisfactory participation







c. Co B, 536th FSB, ARNG Orders 1-4, dated 17 February 1991, reduced the applicant in grade from PFC/E-3 to PV2/E-2, with the reason cited as inefficiency and an effective date of 17 February 1991.  These orders were mailed via Certified Mail to the applicant.   d. Co B, 536th FSB, ARNG memorandum, dated 15 April 1991, Subject: Unsatisfactory Performance and or Unsatisfactory Appearance, shows this memorandum was mailed via Certified Mail to the applicant.  Paragraph 1 of the memorandum states: 



“Attendance records of this unit show that you were absent from the scheduled unit training assembly (UTA) or multiple unit training assembly (MJTA) on period 1, 13 April 1991 because of unsatisfactory performance or unsatisfactory appearance.  The reason for this letter is (unsatisfactory performance late for formation.”   

e. Co B, 536th FSB, ARNG memorandum, dated 1 July 1991, Subject: Separation Under AR 135-178, informs the applicant that the commander is initiating 







action to separate him from the Army National Guard of the State of   and as a Reserve of the Army for Unsatisfactory Performance, chapter 6 under AR 135-178, with his service characterized as under honorable conditions.  The reason for his proposed actions was the applicant had accumulated (4) unexcused absences in a twelve-month period.  This memorandum was mailed via Certified Mail to the applicant. f. Co B, 536th FSB, ARNG memorandum, dated 18 August 1991, Subject:Separation Under AR 600-200, informs the applicant that the commander is initiating action to separate him from the Army National Guard of the State of  and as a Reserve of the Army for Unsatisfactory Performance, chapter 8 under NGR 600-200, with his service characterized as under honorable conditions.  The reason for his proposed actions was the applicant had accumulated (5) unexcused absences in a twelve-month period.  This memorandum was mailed via Certified Mail to the applicant. g. Co B, 536th FSB, ARNG memorandum, dated 21 October 1991, Subject: Reduction Under AR 140-158, Chapter 7, informs the applicant that action was being initiated to reduce him from Private 2 (PV2)/E-2 to Private (PVT)/E-1.  This memorandum was mailed via Certified Mail to the applicant.  The reasons for the proposed action are:   



•Inefficiency due to number of unexcused absences

•Inefficiency due to unsatisfactory participation















h. Co B, 536th FSB, ARNG Orders 1-5, dated 21 October 1991, reduced theapplicant in grade from PV2/E-2 to PVT/E-1, with the reason cited as inefficiency and an effective date of 21 October 1991.  These orders were mailed via Certified Mail to the applicant. i. State of  , Adjutant General’s Department orders 243-76, dated 12 December 1991, shows the applicant was discharged from the Army National Guard and assigned to the Ready Reserve U.S. Army Reserve (USAR) Control Group (Annual Training), with an effective date of 11 December 1991 and the type of discharge as general. j. As previously stated in paragraph 3b, the applicant’s NGB Form 22 shows he was discharged on 11 December 1991 for the Army National Guard of  , under the provisions of National Guard Regulation (NGR) 600-200, paragraph 8-27g, unsatisfactory participation, with a character of service of under honorable conditions. k. USAR Personnel Center orders D-02-618916, dated 13 February 1996 shows the applicant was honorably discharged from the U.S. Army Reserve, under the provisions of AR 135-178, with an effective date of 13 February 1996. 



5.There is no evidence that the applicant applied to the Army Discharge Review Boardfor review of his discharge within the board’s 15-year statute of limitations.

6.National Guard Regulation (NGR) 600-200 and Army Regulation 135-178 governprocedures covering enlisted personnel management of the Army National Guard.Chapter 6 of NGR 600-200 sets the policies, standards, and procedures for theseparation of enlisted Soldiers from the ARNG/ARNGUS.  Paragraph 6-35j of NGR 600-200 refers the reader to AR 135-178, chapter 13 for unsatisfactory participation.Commanders may recommend retention of Soldiers who have accrued 9 or moreunexcused absences within a one-year period.

7.In reaching its determination, the Board can consider the applicant’s petition and hisservice record in accordance with the published equity, injustice, or clemencydetermination guidance.


BOARD DISCUSSION: 

1.The applicant's request for a personal appearance was carefully considered. In thiscase, the evidence of record was sufficient to render a fair and equitable decision. As aresult, a personal appearance before the Board is not necessary to serve the interest ofequity and justice in this case.2.After reviewing the application, all supporting documents and the evidence foundwithin the military record, the Board determined that relief was warranted. One possibleoutcome was to deny relief, However, the majority of Board members determined thatrelief was warranted. The applicant completed IADT, was awarded an MOS and, inaccordance with current regulation, would have been issued an honorable discharge. Inthe absence of evidence indicating any other character of service having been directedand in the interest equity, the Board determined that the applicant should be issued anew DD214 reflecting his character of service as honorable.


BOARD VOTE: 

Mbr 1 Mbr 2 Mbr 3 

: :XX XX GRANT FULL RELIEF 

: : : GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF 

: : : GRANT FORMAL HEARING 

:XX : : DENY APPLICATION 


BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION: 

The Board determined the evidence presented is sufficient to warrant a recommendation for relief.  As a result, the Board recommends that all Department of the Army records of the individual concerned be corrected by amending the applicant’s DD Form 214 for the period ending 5 August 1988 showing the character of service as honorable.  





Microsoft Office Signature Line...



REFERENCES: 

1.Title 10, United States Code, section 1552(b), provides that applications forcorrection of military records must be filed within 3 years after discovery of the allegederror or injustice.  This provision of law also allows the ABCMR to excuse an applicant'sfailure to timely file within the 3-year statute of limitations if the Army Board forCorrection of Military Records (ABCMR) determines it would be in the interest of justiceto do so.

2.National Guard Regulation (NGR) 600-200 and Army Regulation 135-178 governprocedures covering enlisted personnel management of the Army National Guard.Chapter 6 of NGR 600-200 sets the policies, standards, and procedures for theseparation of enlisted Soldiers from the ARNG/ARNGUS.  Paragraph 6-35j of NGR 600-200 refers the reader to AR 135-178, chapter 13 for unsatisfactory participation.Commanders may recommend retention of Soldiers who have accrued 9 or moreunexcused absences within a one-year period.


//NOTHING FOLLOWS//