Search Decisions

Decision Text

ARMY | BCMR | CY1980-1989 | 8603386
Original file (8603386.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied
APPLICANT REQUESTS: Reconsideration of his previous request to correct his records by upgrading his discharge from undesirable to honorable.
APPLICANT STATES : In effect, that there is lack of proof or evidence for the type of discharge he received and that his mother is his representative and she has submitted a statement in his behalf.

 NEW EVIDENCE OR INFORMATION : Incorporated herein by reference are military records which were summarized in a memorandum prepared to reflect the Board's original consideration of his case on 3 June 1987 (COPY ATTACHED).

The mother contends that he was young and immature which constitutes new argument. She states that her son is now 58 years old and in need of an operation and could use the VA Hospital if his discharge was upgraded.

Both the applicant and his mother cite the decision as unfair because his records could not be found as stated in letters from the records center at St. Louis, MO.

 DISCUSSION : Considering all the evidence, allegations, and information presented by the applicant, together with the evidence of record, applicable law and regulations, it is concluded:

1. The applicant’s youth and immaturity are noted, he demonstrated the capacity for honorable service by completion of basic training, an extremely stressful experience, and served honorably for 6 months without an offense.

2. All of the facts in the Board’s original decision were obtained from copies of the applicant’s official military records obtained from various sources to include copies of extracts of his two court-martial’s and non-judicial punishments.

3. 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. The applicant has failed to submit evidence that would satisfy the aforementioned requirement.

 4. Prior to reaching the determination that it was not in the interest of justice to excuse the failure to timely file, the Board looked at the entire file. It was only after all other aspects had been considered and it had been concluded that there was no basis to recommend a correction of the records that the Board considered the statute of limitations. Had the Board determined that an error or injustice existed it undoubtedly would have recommended relief in spite of the failure to submit the application within the 3 year time limit. The Board has never denied an application simply because it was not submitted within the required time.
5. The overall merits of the case, including the latest submissions and arguments are insufficient as a basis for the Board to reverse its previous decision.
6. In view of the foregoing, there is no basis for granting the applicant's request.

 DETERMINATION : The applicant has failed to submit sufficient relevant evidence to demonstrate the existence of probable error or injustice.
BOARD VOTE:
________ ________ ________ GRANT

________ ________ ________ GRANT FORMAL HEARING

________ ________ ________ DENY APPLICATION




                                                      Loren G. Harrell
                                                       Director

Similar Decisions

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080018405

    Original file (20080018405.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Also incorporated herein are the military records which were summarized in the original consideration of his request to upgrade his discharge by the ABCMR in Docket Number AC93-11075, on 26 April 1995, wherein the Board carefully considered the applicant's entire service record as well as the evidence he submitted. With regard to his new issues, the Board determined that the applicant's records should be corrected to show his overseas service in Germany, but not to change the reason for his...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2003 | 2003083659C070212

    Original file (2003083659C070212.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein. The psychiatrist conducting the forensic evaluation concluded that “The history I receive from [the applicant] does not support the diagnosis of any severe personality disorder. Since the applicant has stated in his application to the Board that he deliberately did poorly in training, and he falsely reported having symptoms of an inadequate personality in order to be...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY1990-1993 | 9107175

    Original file (9107175.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    NEW EVIDENCE OR INFORMATION : Incorporated herein by reference are military records which were summarized in a memorandum of consideration (MOC) prepared to reflect the Board's original consideration of his case on 12 August 1992 (COPY ATTACHED).The contention that he was impaired due to alcoholism when he returned from Vietnam and that he was not himself constitutes new argument. There is no evidence of record that the applicant was impaired by alcohol and that he could not both tell right...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY1980-1989 | 8300142

    Original file (8300142.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    APPLICANT REQUESTS : Reconsideration of his previous request to correct his records by upgrading his discharge. The applicant’s military records show that on 22 January 1981, after the approval of his request for a chapter 10 discharge that he was counseled on the requirements for completion of a medical examination prior to his separation. Considering the entirety of the case, the Board has considered all of the applicant’s past and present contentions regarding his desire to have his...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2007 | 20070018018

    Original file (20070018018.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE: 1. The applicant states, in effect, he wishes to appeal the Army Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR) decision, because the first time the Board had his serial number wrong, the Board never considered his state of mind before being absent without leave (AWOL), and the Board never considered his age and immaturity at the time of his offense. In the statement that the applicant provided, he repeated that he wishes to appeal the...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090005576

    Original file (20090005576.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Application for correction of military records (with supporting documents provided, if any). He requests that the Army upgrade his discharge based on the circumstances at the time and on the VA decision to grant him VA benefits. The new evidence is insufficient to support an upgrade of the applicant's discharge.

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2013 | 20130013484

    Original file (20130013484.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 15 March 1977, his immediate commander notified him that he was initiating action to discharge him from the Army under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations – Enlisted Personnel), paragraph 5-37 (Expeditious Discharge Program (EDP)). On 6 April 1977, the applicant was discharged accordingly. The evidence of record shows the applicant demonstrated he could not or would not meet acceptable standards required of enlisted personnel because of his inability to...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY1990-1993 | 9107374A

    Original file (9107374A.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein. The discharge review board (DRB) can only accept a request that is submitted within 15 years of the date of the discharge. DISCUSSION : Considering all the evidence, allegations, and information presented by the applicant, together with the evidence of record, applicable law and regulations, it is concluded:

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY1990-1993 | 9107374

    Original file (9107374.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein. The discharge review board (DRB) can only accept a request that is submitted within 15 years of the date of the discharge. DISCUSSION : Considering all the evidence, allegations, and information presented by the applicant, together with the evidence of record, applicable law and regulations, it is concluded:

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090001369

    Original file (20090001369.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant requests reconsideration of her previous request that the records of her husband, the former service member (FSM) be corrected to show that he elected to change his Survivor Benefit Plan (SBP) coverage from "Natural person with insurable interest-mother" to "Spouse only" coverage upon marriage. The applicant appealed to the ABCMR in an application dated 1 August 2007 requesting that the FSM's records be corrected to show that he elected to change his SBP coverage from "Natural...