Search Decisions

Decision Text

ARMY | BCMR | CY1996 | 9607973C070209
Original file (9607973C070209.txt) Auto-classification: Denied
APPLICANT REQUESTS:  In effect, reinstatement of his active Army commission and recall to active duty.

APPLICANT STATES:  That he initially submitted his request for unqualified resignation when his wife told him she wanted a divorce because she did not like being associated with military life.  After attempting to salvage his marriage without success, he determined that he had made a mistake by submitting his resignation and attempted to withdraw his request.  His request for withdrawal was disapproved.  He goes on to state that he has attempted to obtain employment in the law enforcement field but has been unable to do so because of his poor eyesight and believes that it would be in the best interest of the government to reinstate his commission and recall him to active duty in his former specialty of a military police officer rather than to unnecessarily expend further funds to train a new officer. 

EVIDENCE OF RECORD:  The applicant's military records show:

The applicant was commissioned as a USAR second lieutenant from the ROTC on 20 May 1988.  He was ordered to active duty on 28 July 1989 and accepted a Regular Army commission on 15 November 1989.  He was promoted to the rank of first lieutenant on 24 May 1991.

On 30 June 1992, while serving as a military police officer at Fort Leonard Wood, Missouri, the applicant was honorably discharged from the service under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-120 based on his unqualified resignation.  He had served 3 years, 3 months, and 27 days of total active service.

Although his request for unqualified resignation is not present in the available records, there is evidence to show that the applicant submitted his request for unqualified resignation under the fiscal year 1992 Voluntary Early Release Program (VERP).  He subsequently requested withdrawal of his request which was disapproved by the Department.  The Department determined that the applicant’s request for withdrawal did not warrant approval, in that, requests for withdrawal of an approved resignation under the VERP would only be granted in cases of extreme compassionate reasons or definitely established conveniences of the government.

There is no evidence in the available records to show that the applicant applied to the Army Reserve Personnel Center requesting a USAR commission subsequent to his 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:

1.  In order to justify correction of a military record the applicant must show to the satisfaction of the Board, or it must otherwise appear, that the record is in error or unjust. The applicant has failed to submit evidence that would satisfy the aforementioned requirement.

2.  Unfortunately, applicant’s requests for unqualified resignation and withdrawal, are not available for the Board’s review.  However, at the time the applicant submitted his resignation under the VERP, he was required to agree to the condition that once approved, his request could not be withdrawn unless extreme compassionate reasons existed that would justify withdrawal.  In the absence of evidence to the contrary, it must be presumed that the Department properly considered the applicant’s request for withdrawal and determined that his circumstances did not warrant approval.  Accordingly, there is no basis to approve his request.

3.  The Board also notes that the applicant did not request a USAR commission at the time of his discharge whereby he could have continued his affiliation with the Army in a Reserve status and could have applied for recall to active duty as a USAR officer.

4.  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




		Karl F. Schneider
		Acting Director

Similar Decisions

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140016406

    Original file (20140016406.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant states: a. The applicant's record is void of orders or any evidence that shows his resignation was accepted and processed by AR-PERSCOM or that shows he was ever issued orders discharging him from the USAR Control Group. On 1 May 2014, the applicant submitted a request to HRC requesting his MRD be adjusted to account for his breaks in service from 19 January to 16 August 1993 and from 27 October 2003 to 2 November 2005.

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080004512

    Original file (20080004512.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    Army Regulation 135-175 (Separation of Officers), paragraph 6-10a, states an obligated officer will normally not be permitted to resign his office until such time as the obligated period of service is completed. The advisory opinion noted that the applicant was offered the accession enlistment bonus in error as none of the MI areas of concentration were eligible for the bonus either at the time of his enlistment or at the time he was commissioned. As a result, the Board recommends that all...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2001 | 2001058334C070421

    Original file (2001058334C070421.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    APPLICANT STATES : In effect, that he was unjustly denied the opportunity to withdraw his request for retirement under the Voluntary Early Retirement Program (VERP) and was forced to retire against his wishes. Meanwhile, it appears, based on the documents submitted by the applicant, that he submitted a request to withdraw his application for retirement on 9 January 1996. Although the applicant contended that he (his wife) had an unforeseen medical condition, the applicant has failed to...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080011311

    Original file (20080011311.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    The Chief of the Officer Division opined that when the applicant signed an agreement for the Selected Reserve Officer Accession Bonus in conjunction with his enlistment under the OCS enlistment option, the position he was projected to be assigned to after commissioning required an officer in the MI branch. The advisory opinion noted that the Army Reserve SRIP in effect at the time of his enlistment, and even the succeeding SRIP in effect when he was commissioned, indicated none of the MI...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2001 | 2001057007C070420

    Original file (2001057007C070420.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 8 May 2000, the applicant requested withdrawal of his request for an unqualified resignation so he could “continue to serve his country as an Army Warrant Officer, HUMINT Collection Technician and “DLPT 3/3 Arabic Linguist.” He stated that he trusted that any outstanding issues could be amicably resolved if he continued on active duty. On 24 July 2000, the applicant requested an early retirement since PERSCOM refused to allow him to withdraw his unqualified resignation. In an undated...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090002457

    Original file (20090002457.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    Army Regulation 135-175 (Separation of Officers), paragraph 6-10a, states an obligated officer will normally not be permitted to resign his office until such time as the obligated period of service is completed. Notwithstanding the recommendation by the Chief of the Officer Division, Office of the Deputy Chief of Staff, G-1 who initially requested that the applicant's request be granted as a matter of equity, the advisory opinion in itself stated that the applicant was offered the accession...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2012 | 20120009171

    Original file (20120009171.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    He was transferred to the USAR Individual Ready Reserve (IRR) effective 2 March 1993 to complete his 8-year obligation and should therefore have been separated from the IRR effective 14 May 1996. In a memorandum, dated 24 April 2012, the Iowa ARNG stated its full support of the applicant's request for correction of his separation from the IRR. There is no evidence of record and he provided none to show he resigned or requested to be separated from the IRR upon the completion of his MSO or...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140000187

    Original file (20140000187.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant provides: * Promotion list for MAJ, Army Promotion List (APL), dated 5 August 2003 * Army Reserve Personnel Command Form (ARPC) 155-R (Promotion Qualification Statement) * General Officer congratulatory letter * DA Form 4651-R (Request for Reserve Component Assignment or Attachment) * Request to the U.S. Army Human Resources Command (HRC) for consideration by a special selection board CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE: 1. Unfortunately, in accordance with Army Regulation 135-155...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2001 | 2001052119C070420

    Original file (2001052119C070420.rtf) Auto-classification: Approved

    Following the non-selection for promotion, the applicant requested that this Board correct his records to reflect that the period he was in a questionable status not be considered toward his mandatory promotion date. Records of the ARNG show the applicant’s periods of service as 6 June 1979 to 15 February 1985 - Regular Army (RA), 16 February 1985 to 31 December 1998 - Army Reserve (USAR) and 1 January 1999 to the present - NYARNG. Section 2-2, Inactive and active status, states that an...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY1990-1993 | 9313695

    Original file (9313695.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    APPLICANT REQUESTS : Reinstatement of his dual component status and retroactive retirement in the rank of chief warrant officer two (CW2) effective 1 March 1994. APPLICANT STATES : In effect, that he was never afforded the opportunity to participate in the Reserve Component Dual Component Program and was therefore denied the opportunity to retire in the highest grade he held (CW2). Section 3964 of that title provides that each warrant officer and enlisted member of the RA, is entitled,...