| Mr. Carl W. S. Chun | Director | |
| Mr. Lee Cates | Analyst |
| Ms. Sherri V. Ward | Chairperson | |
| Mr. George D. Paxson | Member | |
| Mr. James E. Anderholm | Member |
APPLICANT REQUESTS: That his records be corrected to show that he was promoted to the rank of master sergeant, pay grade E-8, retroactive to 1976, with all pay and allowances. His name appeared on the master sergeant promotion list in the Army Times. He also requests that after promotion to master sergeant he be considered for promotion to sergeant major E-9. He indicates that his records were flagged pending UCMJ (Uniform code of Military Justice) action and completion of an investigation. The investigation was dropped because the charges were unsubstantiated. Further, he indicates he was never court-martialed, never fined, and never received a letter of reprimand, but was discriminated against based on being a minority soldier. Counsel was silent on the issues.
PURPOSE: To determine whether the application was submitted within the time limit established by law, and if not, whether it is in the interest of justice to excuse the failure to timely file.
EVIDENCE OF RECORD: The applicant's available military records show:
On 10 April 1975, he reenlisted in the Army after completing 17 years, 4 months and 10 days of prior active service.
On 7 October 1955, he was convicted by a special court-martial for discharging a .45 caliber pistol in the barracks on 28 August 1955. His sentence was a forfeiture of $50.
On 17 May 1963, he accepted nonjudicial punishment (NJP) under Article 15, UCMJ for theft of a US Postal Money Order in the amount of $100 from a fellow soldier. His punishment included a reduction to pay grade E-4 and ½ month pay for 2 months.
On 29 April 1964, he accepted NJP under Article 15, UCMJ for being AWOL from 13 to 20 January 1964. His punishment included a reduction to pay grade E-3 (suspended) and restriction.
On 6 April 1965, he accepted NJP under Article 15, UCMJ for being absent without reveille. His punishment included a reduction to pay grade E-3 (suspended) and restriction.
On 12 April 1976, the Army Times published the “recommended” list for promotion to master sergeant on which the applicant’s name appeared.
On 1 November 1976, the applicant’s records were flagged based on an investigation of his violation of Article 134, UCMJ. He was advised of the reasons.
On 3 January 1977, his battalion commander issued a Letter of Reprimand for having sex with his daughters, under the age of 16. The commander indicated that on this date, the General Court-Martial Convening Authority withdrew charges because witnesses declined to return to Germany for trial. He was advised that he had admitted, under oath, to the commander and Criminal Investigative Division agents, that “he had engaged in a form of sexual activities with his daughters.”
On 6 January 1978, the battalion commander recommended the removal of the applicant from the promotion list based on his prior indisciplines. The Office of the Deputy Chief of Staff for Personnel approved the request.
On 23 February 1978, he voluntarily requested retirement as an exception to policy effective 31 March 1978, based on the removal of a flagging action.
On 31 March 1978, he was honorably separated, in pay grade E-7, under Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 12, based on having sufficient service for retirement. On 1 April 1978, he was transferred to the retired list. His separation document indicates he had 20 years, 3 months and 14 days of creditable service and 7 days of lost time.
On 27 June 1978, the Department of the Army Standby Enlisted Advisory Board, which adjourned on 3 November 1977, denied his request for promotion reconsideration.
Title 10, U.S. Code, 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. Failure to file within 3 years may be excused by a correction board if it finds it would be in the interest of justice to do so.
DISCUSSION: The alleged error or injustice was, or with reasonable diligence should have been discovered on 31 March 1978, the date of his separation. The time for the applicant to file a request for correction of any error or injustice expired on 31 March 1981.
The application is dated 20 November 2000 and the applicant has not explained or otherwise satisfactorily demonstrated by competent evidence that it would be in the interest of justice to excuse the failure to apply within the time allotted.
DETERMINATION: The subject application was not submitted within the time required. The applicant has not presented and the records do not contain sufficient justification to conclude that it would be in the interest of justice to grant the relief requested or to excuse the failure to file within the time prescribed by law.
BOARD VOTE:
________ ________ ________ EXCUSE FAILURE TO TIMELY FILE
________ ________ ________ GRANT FORMAL HEARING
_jea____ _svw____ _gp_____ CONCUR WITH DETERMINATION
| CASE ID | AR2001051549 |
| SUFFIX | |
| RECON | |
| DATE BOARDED | 20010410 |
| TYPE OF DISCHARGE | |
| DATE OF DISCHARGE | |
| DISCHARGE AUTHORITY | |
| DISCHARGE REASON | |
| BOARD DECISION | DENY |
| REVIEW AUTHORITY | |
| ISSUES 1. | 131 |
| 2. | |
| 3. | |
| 4. | |
| 5. | |
| 6. |
ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | 20110021784
The applicant requests, in effect, removal of a DA Form 2627 (Record of Proceedings Under Article 15, Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ)), dated 2 May 1978, from his records. The decision to file the original DA Form 2627 in the performance section or restricted section of the OMPF will be made by the imposing commander at the time punishment is imposed. Army Regulation 27-10 states that commanders may impose NJP for the administration of discipline under the provisions of Article 15...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090003719
This provision of law also allows the Army Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR) to excuse an applicants 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. On 1 September 1979, the FSM authenticated a DD Form 1883 (Survivor Benefit Plan Election Certificate) that shows he was married, that he elected spouse only coverage, that he elected to provide an annuity based on the full amount of his...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100026588
c. a memorandum from the Deputy IG of the 81st Regional Support Command, Fort Jackson, SC, dated 7 September 2010, wherein the author states that after conducting a thorough inquiry and reviewing all the facts, and in accordance with Army Regulation 600-8-19 (Enlisted Promotions and Reductions), paragraph 5-27a(11-b), the applicant should have been removed from the PPRL when he received the Article 15 on 6 November 2007. It states in: a. Paragraph 5-2b, field-grade commanders of any unit...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090021949
His evidence shows when he retired from the military, personnel at the Corps Adjutant General's (AG) office, Fort Bragg, NC knew his address in Fayetteville, NC and the letter dated "2 May 1986" from DAPC-MSP-E, United States Army Military Personnel Center should have been forwarded to his address; c. It is his firm belief that the letter of reprimand (LOR) dated 1 October 1983, which was improperly filed in his Official Military Personnel File (OMPF) because the filing had not been directed...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2006 | AR20060014955C071029
On 3 November 2005, the applicant submitted a personal action requesting the return of his 1 July 2005 promotion board packet. The congressman was further informed that the applicant was appropriately punished and that he was notified by his commanding officer of the recommendation to remove his name from the promotion selection list. Chapter 4-18(d) of this regulation specifies that the Commander, Army Human Resources Command (AHRC) will determine if material error existed in a soldier’s...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100027845
The applicant requests: * reinstatement to the rank/grade of sergeant first class (SFC)/E-7 in the Arizona Army National Guard (AZARNG) * removal of the Arizona Nonjudicial Punishment (AZNJP) Form 1 (Record of Proceedings Under Article 26-1015, Arizona Code of Military Justice (ACMJ)), dated 1 July 2010, from his official military personnel file (OMPF) * payment of special duty additional pay (SDAP) for the months of April, May, and June 2010 (recruiter pay) * opportunity to compete for...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090012772
The applicant provides the following documents in support of his application: Suspension of Favorable Actions Management Reports AAA-095, dated 28 February 2007 and 4 March 2007; DA Form 2627 (Record of Proceedings Under Article 15, UCMJ); DA Forms 268 (Report to Suspend Favorable Personnel Actions); Electronic Mail (e-mail) Messages; U.S. Army Recruiting Battalion Denver Memorandum, dated 14 May 2007; U.S. Army Human Resources Command (HRC) Order Number 137-1, dated 17 May 2007; and U.S....
ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | 20110014657
IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 19 January 2012 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20110014657 THE BOARD CONSIDERED THE FOLLOWING EVIDENCE: 1. The applicants record does not contain nor did the applicant provide any evidence which shows he was promoted to the rank/grade of SSG/E-6 following the revocation of his promotion prior to his discharge from service. _______ _ X_______ ___ CHAIRPERSON I certify that herein is recorded the true and complete record of the proceedings of the Army Board for Correction of...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080002659
The applicant requests that his records be corrected to show he was promoted to Master Sergeant, E-8. By letter dated 8 April 1977, USAEREC informed the applicant that an Army Standby Enlisted Advisory Board reviewed his records and determined he should be barred from reenlistment under the QMP. It appears that a 10-year old Article 15 would have been a valid consideration in determining who would be recommended for a HQDA bar to reenlistment.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2005 | 20050005982C070206
The applicant states, through counsel, that he was suspended from drill sergeant duties pending investigation of allegations of trainee abuse and a suspension of favorable personnel actions (flag) was imposed on him. TRADOC Regulation 350-6, paragraph 2-5, states that commanders are responsible for reporting trainee abuse allegations as defined in these guidelines unless the commander can quickly determine the allegation is not credible. The promotion board members would have seen...