ARMY | DRB | CY2005 | 20050011479
On 8 February 2004, a board of officers recommended the applicant be separated with a characterization of service as other than honorable. On 23 February 2004, the applicant was discharged from the USAR with a characterization of service of other than honorable under the provisions of Army Regulation 135-175. The applicant has provided insufficient evidence to show his 23 February 2004 separation was approved by an improper authority, and the ADRB action did not change his date of separation.
ARMY | DRB | CY2005 | 20050011665
Scott W. Faught | |Member | The Board considered the following evidence: Exhibit A - Application for correction of military records. The applicant requests, in effect, award of the Korea Defense Service Medal (KDSM), and correction of the middle initial of his spouse entered in Item 19b (Nearest Relative) of his 30 April 1993 separation document (DD Form 214). As a result, the Board recommends that all Department of the Army records of the individual concerned be corrected by showing his...
ARMY | DRB | CY2005 | 20050011727
The applicant requests, in effect, that the date of birth (DOB) entered in Item 9 (Date of Birth) and the military occupational specialty (MOS) entered in Item 23a (Specialty Number and Title) of his 16 April 1969 separation document (DD Form 214) be corrected. The evidence of record confirms that the applicant's DOB was in fact 30 May 1946, as evidenced by entries on his DD Form 47, DA Form 20, and birth certificate. The Board further determined that the evidence presented is insufficient...
ARMY | DRB | CY2005 | 20050011736
The applicant's spouse provides, on behalf of the applicant, a general power of attorney; a DD Form 2839 (Career Status Bonus (CSB) Election); a Request for Personnel Action; an email dated 1 June 2004; an NGB Form 22-5- 4-E (Addendum to DD Form 4) dated 6 June 2004; release from active duty orders dated 11 June 2004; reassignment orders dated 23 March 2001; the applicant's DA Form 2-1 (Personnel Qualification Record); the applicant's DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from...
ARMY | DRB | CY2005 | 20050011770
The applicant’s military records are not available to the Board for review. The applicant's separation document shows he was inducted into the Army and entered active duty on 20 November 1942, and that he served until 16 October 1943, at which time he was honorably discharged under the provisions of Section II, Army Regulation 615-360, by reason of disability. The applicant's contention that the reason for discharge outlined in the OTSG Hospital Admission Record on file is not consistent...
ARMY | DRB | CY2005 | 20050011796
During the initial active force drawdown period (23 October 1992 and ending on 1 October 1999), the Secretary of the Army could authorize an enlisted member with at least 15 but less than 20 years of creditable service a length of service retirement. The August 1995 message implementing the FY96 Regular Army Enlisted Early Retirement Program did not list eligible MOSs; PERSCOM determined which applications would be approved based upon force structure and the best interest of the Army. ...
ARMY | DRB | CY2005 | 20050011815
John M. Moeller | |Member | The Board considered the following evidence: Exhibit A - Application for correction of military records. This case is being considered using reconstructed records, which primarily consist of the applicant’s WD AGO Form 53-55 and an OTSG Hospital Admission Record for 1944. By regulation, in order to support award of the PH, there must be evidence showing the wound for which the award is being made was received as a direct result of, or caused by enemy action,...
ARMY | DRB | CY2005 | 20050011878
Rose M. Lys | |Member | The Board considered the following evidence: Exhibit A - Application for correction of military records. The applicant requests that his DD Form 214 (Armed Forces of the United States Report of Transfer or Discharge) be corrected to show he served in Vietnam. Army Regulation 600-8-22 (Military Awards) provides for award of the Vietnam Service Medal.
ARMY | DRB | CY2005 | 20050011890
The applicant requests, in effect, that her discharge from the United States Army Reserve (USAR) be voided and that she instead be transferred to the Retired Reserve. At the completion of this period of active duty service, she was honorably separated and transferred to the United States Army Reserve (USAR) where she continuously served through the date of her discharge. He also informed the applicant she would be scheduled for a formal hearing.
ARMY | DRB | CY2005 | 20050011997
Edward E. Montgomery | |Member | The Board considered the following evidence: Exhibit A - Application for correction of military records. The term “good years” is an unofficial term used to mean years in which 50 or more retirement points are earned during each year and which count as qualifying years of service for retirement benefits at age 60. As a result, the Board recommends that all Department of the Army records of the individual concerned be corrected by: a. voiding his separation...
ARMY | DRB | CY2005 | 20050012071
During the original review of the case, it was concluded that absent any evidence of record to corroborate the information contained in the statement provided to the Board, there was an insufficient evidentiary basis to support award of the PH in the applicant's case. As pointed out in the original Record of Proceedings, the PH was not included in the list of awards contained on the applicant's separation document (DD Form 214), and Item 29 (Wounds Received as a Result of Action with Enemy...
ARMY | DRB | CY2005 | 20050012072
His father had reiterated the story of what he was advised at the separation center, which was not to include the PH in his separation document, that the medal would remain a part of his record. However, by regulation, in order to support award of the PH, there must be evidence that the wound or injury for which the award is being made was received as a result of enemy action. Although there is a medical treatment record that shows the FSM was treated for ankle injury during World War II,...
ARMY | DRB | CY2005 | 20050012152
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 23 March 2006 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20050012152 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. This is true, since he was promoted to Major on 1 July 1955 he should have been moved up one rank upon retirement. This is not true, as per the attached Certificate of Retirement from the Armed Forces he retired on...
ARMY | DRB | CY2005 | 20050012177
The applicant requests, in effect, that his undesirable discharge (UD) be upgraded. The applicant states, in effect, that he is entitled to an upgrade of his discharge based on a Presidential Pardon. On 3 March 1974, the applicant was discharged accordingly.
ARMY | DRB | CY2005 | 20050012207
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 2 March 2006 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20050012207 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. In this case, the evidence of record shows the applicant held an infantry MOS and was assigned to a Cavalry Regiment, which while not a traditional qualifying infantry unit, could have been considered a qualifying unit...
ARMY | DRB | CY2005 | 20050012225
Robert D. Morig | |Member | The Board considered the following evidence: Exhibit A - Application for correction of military records. Based on his service in France with the 78th Division, he is also entitled to the World War I Victory Medal with St. Mihiel, Meuse-Argonne and Defensive Sector Battle Clasps and the France Service Clasp, and the World War I Victory Lapel Button (Silver), which denotes he was wounded in action. As a result, the Board recommends that all Department of the...
ARMY | DRB | CY2005 | 20050012261
During its original review of the applicant's case, the Board found that the evidence of record showed the applicant served in the Pennsylvania Army National Guard (PAARNG), and was trained in, awarded and served in military occupational specialty (MOS) 88M (Motor Transport Operator), and that he served with the 253rd Transportation Company during his assignment in Southwest Asia (SWA). However, by regulation, assignment to a qualifying infantry unit alone is not sufficient to support award...
ARMY | DRB | CY2005 | 20050012428
On 17 December 1970, the applicant was discharged accordingly. On 5 March 1973, the Army Discharge Review Board (ADRB), after careful consideration of the applicant’s case, determined his discharge was proper and equitable, and it voted to deny his request for an upgrade of his discharge. The applicant's contention that his discharge should be upgraded because he served during a time of war and his altercation with a Vietnamese civilian was inevitable, and the supporting documents...
ARMY | DRB | CY2005 | 20050012432
The PMS was troubled by the applicant's failure to disclose his offenses in terms of the applicant's integrity, but he felt the probation officer's letter lent enough evidence to allow sufficient benefit of the doubt to be given that the applicant honestly did not believe he needed to report the offenses that were adjudicated in Juvenile Court to the USACC. He stated he did not fail to disclose civil convictions as he was never convicted of any crimes. The advisory opinion noted that the...
ARMY | DRB | CY2005 | 20050012534
David K. Hassenritter | |Member | The Board considered the following evidence: Exhibit A - Application for correction of military records. THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE: 1. He requests that based on these reasons, his claim be favorably considered by the Board.
ARMY | DRB | CY2005 | 20050012562
This will apply whether the particular condition was noted at the time of entrance into active service or is determined upon the evidence of record or accepted medical principles to have existed at that time. Given the applicant's assignment history (serving for about a year in an airborne unit and under combat conditions before being found unfit to perform airborne duties), it appears his condition was aggravated by his military service. It is necessary to deduct from his present degree...
ARMY | DRB | CY2005 | 20050012592
The applicant’s Enlisted Qualification Record (DA Form 20) shows he served in the Republic of Vietnam (RVN) from 8 January 1971 through 19 December 1971. By regulation, in order to support award of the PH, there must be evidence that wound for which the award is being was received as a direct result of, or was caused by enemy action. As a result, the Board recommends that all Department of the Army records of the individual concerned be corrected by awarding him the first award of the Army...
ARMY | DRB | CY2005 | 20050012596
The evidence of record confirms the applicant served on active duty in the United States for more than 30 consecutive days after 11 September 2001. It further shows that he was awarded the AFEM for his service in support of ODS in Kuwait, and that this award is listed in his record and separation document. He is not entitled to the GWOTEM because he cannot be authorized this award for the same period for which the AFEM or ICM is authorized.
ARMY | DRB | CY2005 | 20050012604
The applicant requests, in effect, that the date entered in Item 15 (date Entered Active Duty This Period) of his 3 December 1974 separation document (DD Form 214) be corrected. Item 15 of the DD Form 214 issued to him at this time contains the date 20 December 1968, which is the date of his reenlistment. Absent any evidence that the applicant has or will suffer an injustice as a result of the date entered in Item 15 of his 3 December 1974 separation document, and given all his active duty...
ARMY | DRB | CY2005 | 20050012605
The applicant requests reconsideration of his earlier request to correct his DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) to reflect the date he was discharged from the U. S. Army Reserve (USAR). Counsel states the only discharge certificate the applicant has received is the DD Form 214. Counsel provides the applicant's DD Form 214 and his discharge orders.
ARMY | DRB | CY2005 | 20050012609
The evidence of record confirms the applicant completed a total of 18 years, 1 month, and 17 days of active duty service as of 30 April 1995, the date of his REFRAD for retirement. By law, a member may be advanced to the highest grade satisfactorily held on active duty when his active duty service plus his time on the Retired List equals 30 years. In this case, since the applicant had completed 18 years, 1 month, and 17 days of active duty service as of 30 April 1995, and that he was...
ARMY | DRB | CY2005 | 20050012699
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 7 March 2006 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20050012699 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. The PH is not included in the list of authorized awards contained on the DD Form 214. As a result, the Board recommends that all Department of the Army records of the individual concerned be corrected by awarding him...
ARMY | DRB | CY2005 | 20050012758
On 27 August 1991, he was found to be not qualified for retention and referred to a Medical Evaluation Board (MEB). In addition, it appears the applicant's physical disability processing began after he requested voluntary retirement but at least seven months before he was due to retire for length of service. It appears the previous Record of Proceedings meant to convey the fact that, if the applicant had been allowed to remain on active duty in order to retire for length of service, as...
ARMY | DRB | CY2005 | 20050012770
The applicant (now deceased) requested, in effect, that his records be corrected to show he was diagnosed with a malignant tumor while he was in the Army and that his separation with a zero percent disability rating be changed to a medical retirement. A Medical Evaluation Board (MEB) was initiated in April 2004 and he was medically discharged due to chronic pain. It is recognized that the applicant was diagnosed with a malignant tumor about 4 to 6 months after his discharge from the Army.
ARMY | DRB | CY2005 | 20050012772
To be eligible for the SRB, a Soldier must have been serving within his or her first 16 years of active service, must have reenlisted in the AGR program for at least 3 years, and must have been serving on AGR duty in the rank of Sergeant, E-5 through SFC. That office noted the applicant failed to reenlist before reaching her 16 years of active service on 11 April 2005 because she was erroneously told she could only reenlist within a 90-day window of her ETS to qualify for the SRB. The...
ARMY | DRB | CY2005 | 20050012979
David K. Hassenritter | |Member | The Board considered the following evidence: Exhibit A - Application for correction of military records. On 16 March 1981, the Army Discharge Review Board (ADRB) voted to upgrade the applicant's UD to a general, under honorable conditions discharge (GD) based on his overall record of service; however, it concluded the reason for his discharge was proper and equitable. The U.S. Court of Appeals, observing that applicants to the Army Discharge Review Board...
ARMY | DRB | CY2005 | 20050013063
ARMY | DRB | CY2005 | 20050013268
During its original review of the applicant's case, the Board found that the applicant was properly credited with all the military service, both active and inactive, that he had completed, and as a result, there was no error or injustice related to the military service credit he received. The applicant's Personnel Qualification Record (DA Form 2), dated 12 April 1995, shows his Pay Entry Basic Date (PEBD) as 26 September 1973, and his Basic Active Service Date (BASD) as 1 September 1974. ...
ARMY | DRB | CY2005 | 20050013485
The applicant states, in effect, she would like her RE code upgraded so that she may be eligible to reenlist. The evidence of record in this case confirms the applicant was appropriately assigned a SPD code of JHJ based on the authority and reason for her separation. As a result, the Board recommends that all Department of the Army records of the individual concerned be corrected by showing she was assigned an RE-3 code upon her 17 January 1996 separation in lieu of the current RE-4 code;...
ARMY | DRB | CY2005 | 20050013538
On 21 January 1988, while serving at Fort Polk, the applicant accepted nonjudicial punishment (NJP) under the provisions of Article 15 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ), for failing to go to his appointed place of duty at the prescribed time. In his request for discharge, the applicant also indicated that he understood that by requesting discharge, he was admitting guilt to the charge(s) against him, or of a lesser included offense, that also authorized the imposition of a bad...
ARMY | DRB | CY2005 | 20050013792
The applicant's record shows that he enlisted in the Regular Army and entered active duty on 30 May 1987. On 9 October 1990, the separation authority approved the findings and recommendations of the ASB, and directed the applicant be separated with a GD under the provisions of chapter 14, Army Regulation 635-200. The separation authority did recognize the applicant's long record of service by granting a GD, rather than the under other than honorable conditions (UOTHC) discharge that is...
ARMY | DRB | CY2005 | 20050014118
David K. Hassenritter | |Member | The Board considered the following evidence: Exhibit A - Application for correction of military records. An undesirable discharge was normally considered appropriate for members separating under these provisions. In order to justify correction of a military record the applicant must show to the satisfaction of the Board, or it must otherwise satisfactorily appear, that the record is in error or unjust.
ARMY | DRB | CY2005 | 20050014127
On 7 December 1983, the separation authority approved the applicant’s request for discharge and directed that he receive an UOTHC discharge, and that he be reduced to the lowest enlisted grade. On 19 December 1983, the applicant was discharged accordingly. In order to justify correction of a military record the applicant must show to the satisfaction of the Board, or it must otherwise satisfactorily appear, that the record is in error or unjust.
ARMY | DRB | CY2005 | 20050014177
The applicant states, in effect, that he received a combat related injury during a combat operation in the Republic of Vietnam (RVN) on 17 March 1969, which he believes entitles him to a second award of the PH. However, by regulation, in order to support award of the PH, there must be evidence confirming that the wound for which the award is being made was received as a result of enemy action, that the wound required treatment by military medical personnel, and a record of this treatment...
ARMY | DRB | CY2005 | 20050014269
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 9 March 2006 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20050014269 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. Records show that the alleged error or injustice related to award of the PH now under consideration should have been discovered on 21 June 1946, the date of the FSM's separation. Therefore, the Board requests that...
ARMY | DRB | CY2005 | 20050014825
She claims the fluctuating eye condition was the reason the applicant went absent without leave (AWOL). The applicant’s contention that his discharge was the result of the worsening of an eye condition that existed before he entered service, and the supporting documents he submitted were carefully considered. Notwithstanding his current medical condition, which is unfortunate, absent any medical evidence confirming that his eye condition severely impaired his ability to serve, there is an...
ARMY | DRB | CY2005 | 20050015076
The advisory opinion acknowledged the PMS, Siena College signed the applicant's scholarship contract on behalf of the Army but erroneously stated in the contract that the scholarship was for 3 vice 2 years. In this case, the applicant entered into a written contract with the Army whereby the applicant agreed to serve 4 years on active duty in return for a 3-year scholarship to attend law school. The applicant is required to complete 4 years of active duty to obtain the full benefits of the...
ARMY | DRB | CY2005 | 20050015080
The Chief, AMEDD Special Pay Branch, stated that his office had authorized payment of the outstanding ISP for $13,000/year effective 1 October 2004 through 30 September 2005. The evidence shows the applicant was fully eligible and entitled to payment of the ISP at $13,000/year for the period of 1 October 2003 through 30 September 2004. The Special Pay Branch could not initiate ISP to cover the period from 1 October 2003 through 30 September 2004, because the period of arrears exceeded the...
ARMY | DRB | CY2005 | 20050015371
Ronald D. Gant | |Member | The Board considered the following evidence: Exhibit A - Application for correction of military records. Thus, to complete 20 years of qualifying service for retirement, his MRD needs to be adjusted to 18 November 2006. The applicant provides the 26 March 2004 letter forwarding the Army Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR) Docket Number AR2003087547 to him; a Chronological Statement of Retirement Points dated 15 March 2003; a memorandum dated 25 April...
ARMY | DRB | CY2005 | 20050015388
Richard G. Sayre | |Member | The Board considered the following evidence: Exhibit A - Application for correction of military records. The applicant requests that she be determined to be entitled to the Survivor Benefit Plan (SBP) as a "forgotten widow" based upon the service of her deceased spouse, a former service member (FSM). Public Law 105-85, enacted 18 November 1997, provided for an SBP annuity to be paid to the qualified surviving spouse of each member of the uniformed services...
ARMY | DRB | CY2005 | 20050015732
The final message on the subject was from the Chief, Medical Corps Division, USAREC, who confirmed the applicant would have constructive service credit for 22 years of service, which authorized his entry grade of colonel, but that this was not creditable service for pay purposes. This official further indicated that his VA service was credited as constructive service, which allowed him to be appointed in the grade of colonel; however, only time spent in the military, which included the...
ARMY | DRB | CY2005 | 20050016109
The evidence of record confirms the applicant submitted her OCONUS COLA exception request in sufficient time for it to be processed and approved by the appropriate DA officials using Secretarial authority well before this authority expired on 1 October 2005. The Board determined that the evidence presented was 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 showing her...
ARMY | DRB | CY2005 | 20050016135
In similar cases, the DFAS has indicated that the DEERS provides the collection data and once a spouse is registered in DEERS, the deduction for FSGLI is made retroactive to 1 November 2001, or the date of marriage whichever is later if no action to decline FSGLI has been taken. Further, the implementation instructions for the FSGLI program clearly stipulated that in the case of married couples on active duty, premiums would be automatically deducted from each spouse’s pay for coverage of...
ARMY | DRB | CY2005 | 20050016137
The LRP is a Department of the Army enlistment option authorized by Title 10 of the United States Code, section 2171 (10 USC 2171), which provides the legal authority for the education loan repayment program for enlisted members on active duty in specified military specialties. In doing so, the applicant's military records should be corrected to show his Statement of Enlistment was amended to include the sentence, “If a student loan is accepted by the official processing you for enlistment...
ARMY | DRB | CY2005 | 20050016302
The applicant provides two NGB Forms 89 (Proceedings of a Federal Recognition Examining Board), dated 8 April 2004 and 13 September 2005; two NGB Forms 337 (Oaths of Office), dated 14 April 2004 and 13 September 2005; two DA Forms 71 (Oath of Office – Military Personnel), dated 14 April 2004 and 13 September 2005; State appointment orders; two Federal Recognition Board (FRB) memorandums; and Federal Recognition orders dated 16 September 2005. If the member meets the qualifications and...