Search Decisions

Decision Text

ARMY | BCMR | CY2001 | 2001055550C070420
Original file (2001055550C070420.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied
MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION


         IN THE CASE OF:
        


         BOARD DATE: 30 August 2001
         DOCKET NUMBER: AR2001055550

         I certify that hereinafter is recorded the record of consideration of the Army Board for Correction of Military Records in the case of the above-named individual.

Mr. Carl W. S. Chun Director
Ms. P. A. Castle Analyst

The following members, a quorum, were present:

Mr. Raymond V. O’Connor, Jr. Chairperson
Mr. Christopher J. Prosser Member
Ms. Linda D. Simmons Member

         The Board, established pursuant to authority contained in 10 U.S.C. 1552, convened at the call of the Chairperson on the above date. In accordance with Army Regulation 15-185, the application and the available military records pertinent to the corrective action requested were reviewed to determine whether to authorize a formal hearing, recommend that the records be corrected without a formal hearing, or to deny the application without a formal hearing if it is determined that insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate the existence of probable material error or injustice.

         The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein.

         The Board considered the following evidence:

         Exhibit A - Application for correction of military
records
         Exhibit B - Military Personnel Records (including
         advisory opinion, if any)


APPLICANT REQUESTS: Recharacterization of his dishonorable discharge.

APPLICANT STATES: In effect, that he thought the Presidential pardon he received on 23 December 1966 had corrected his dishonorable discharge. He states that the reason he was absent without leave (AWOL) for 5 years is because the Canadian government implied he should not return to the United States. Further that he was a Canadian citizen and not a United States citizen and that his parents needed him to provide financial assistance to the family. He hopes that by explaining his life history, including a record of work, and character references, the Board will upgrade his discharge.

The applicant states in his personal statement to the Board that his father was born in Waterville, Connecticut (CT) but lived in Canada since toddler age, his whole life. The applicant was born in Canada and was third of fourteen children. At the age of 18 the applicant came to the United States to work (as his father and grandfather had done) at the lumber camps in Maine (ME), Vermont (VT), New York (NY), New Hampshire (NH) and CT. He traveled from state to state so he used the address of a relative living in Berlin, NH as a permanent address.

Upon arrival home the applicant found that his parents had requested that the Canadian government investigate whether their son had to return to the United States after his leave or could he remain in Canada and help them with the farm, the finances and the children. The applicant states that government officials told him he was a Canadian citizen, not a United States citizen, and that he had no business being in the United States Army.

The applicant reluctantly remained in Canada hoping the Army would come and get him. As time passed evidence of record shows he decided to write the US Consulate on 26 January 1957 to establish his status and was notified as to the documentation he would need to present to the United States Immigration and Naturalization Service officer. The applicant left his wife and three children in Canada and reported to Ft Dix, New Jersey on 1 April 1957.

EVIDENCE OF RECORD: The applicant's military records were lost or destroyed in the National Personnel Records Center fire of 1973. Information herein was obtained from reconstructed service records.

Evidence found in the reconstructed record reveals that in 1950 the applicant was drafted from Berlin, NH and upon completion of the physical was rejected and sent home. In 1951 he was again drafted from Berlin, NH but took the physical in CT and was found qualified and after induction was sent to Fort Devens, Massachusetts (MA) for basic training. He graduated from basic training and was assigned to Fort Bragg, North Carolina (NC) where after two months he graduated from combat infantry training. Subsequently, on 28 September 1951 the applicant departed to Canada for 16 days leave prior to his overseas deployment to Germany.

On 15 June 1957 a general court-martial convicted the applicant of violation of the Uniform Code of Military Justice, Article 85 (5 years AWOL). The sentence which was comprised of confinement at hard labor for six months, forfeiture of all pay and a dishonorable discharge was approved as adjudged and was affirmed upon review. The applicant was discharged on 6 September 1957.

The applicant submits the following 20 documents in support of his post-service accomplishments, community service and good character;

         a. Certificate of marriage dated January 1979.

         b. Certificate of his father’s birth on 13 January 1898 in Waterville,
Maine.

         c. Course completion certificate for “Course O” for Oil Heat Service dated 1958-1959.

         d. Certificate of appreciation for “dedicated service” from the Owner’s Association in Bristol, CT.

         e. Diploma from the Commercial Trade Institute for completion of Refrigeration and Air Conditioning dated April 1955.

         f. Certificate of completion of the “Air Flow Seminar” from the Refrigeration Service Engineers Society dated 10 February 1985.

         g. Certificate of Qualification from the Secretary of the State of CT electing the applicant as “justice of the peace” for the town of Bristol, CT from January 73 to January 75.

         h. Certificate of honorary life membership in the Knights of Columbus.

         i. Certification by the state of CT, Department of Consumer Protection to be licensed as an electrical unlimited journey person dated 6 October 2000.

         j. Certification by the state of CT, Department of Consumer Protection to be licensed as a plumbing and piping limited contractor dated 1 November 2000.

         k. Certification by the state of CT, Department of Consumer Protection to be licensed as a heating, piping and cooling unlimited contractor dated 1 September 2000.

         l. Letter of complaint to the applicant as the President of the Southern New England Hockey League, Incorporated.

         m. Two pictures of the Bristol Hockey Team accepting awards with the applicant.

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 has failed to show to the satisfaction of the Board, evidence to conclude that the dishonorable discharge was incorrect or unjust.

2. The applicant’s trial by general court-martial was warranted by the gravity of the offense. His conviction and discharge were effected in accordance with applicable law and regulations, and the discharge appropriately characterizes the misconduct for which he was convicted.

3. Evidence submitted to the Board by the applicant shows the Canadian government at the time of the offense advised the applicant to return to his unit in the United States after seeking assistance with the Immigration and Naturalization Services. The applicant’s contentions of being prevented by the Canadian government to return to his Army unit are unfounded. In any case, these issues relate to evidentiary and procedural matters which were finally and conclusively adjudicated in the court-martial appellate process to include the post trial reviews, and furnish no basis for recharacterization of the discharge.

4. While the Board has taken cognizance of the applicant’s personal and family problems at the time of the offense, such are not considered sufficiently mitigating so as to warrant an upgrade of the discharge.

5. The documentation related to the applicant’s post service accomplishment, his contributions to society and the expressions of support from other sources is noted. However significant these considerations may be they do not outweigh the severity of the offense for which the applicant was convicted and discharged.

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

__lds ___ __rvo ___ ___cp___ DENY APPLICATION





                  Carl W. S. Chun
                  Director, Army Board for Correction
of Military Records




INDEX

CASE ID AR2001055550
SUFFIX
RECON YYYYMMDD
DATE BOARDED 2001/08/30
TYPE OF DISCHARGE DD
DATE OF DISCHARGE 1957/09/06
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY AR
DISCHARGE REASON
BOARD DECISION DENY
REVIEW AUTHORITY
ISSUES 1. 189 110.00
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.


Similar Decisions

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2012 | 20120020775

    Original file (20120020775.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Application for correction of military records (with supporting documents provided, if any). The applicant provides: * DD Form 214 * Certificate of Birth and Baptism * his Social Security card * United States of America Permanent Resident card CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE: 1. A DD Form 4 (Enlistment Contract - Armed Forces of the United States), dated 28 May 1970, contained in the applicant's military service records shows in item 22 (Citizenship) the entry "CANADA."

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2006 | 20060012714

    Original file (20060012714.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant requests that his undesirable discharge, characterized as under other than honorable conditions, be upgraded to honorable and that his service in the Republic of Vietnam (RVN) be verified. On 26 July 1972, after consulting with counsel, the applicant submitted a voluntary request for discharge for the good of the service under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200 (Enlisted Personnel Separations), chapter 10. Army policy states that although an honorable or general...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090018519

    Original file (20090018519.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Application for correction of military records (with supporting documents provided, if any). Item 7 (U.S. Citizen) of the applicant's DD Form 214 shows he was not a U.S. Citizen at the time of his discharge on 27 October 1972. The evidence of record shows the applicant enlisted in the Army on 28 September 1970 and he indicated that he was a German citizen.

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2013 | 20130007140

    Original file (20130007140.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    By law and regulation, the HOR is the place recorded as the home of the individual at the time of their enlistment or induction, and there is no authority to change the HOR officially recorded at the time of entry into military service. The evidence of record contains enlistment contracts authenticated by the applicant at the time of his initial entry into the Army and at the time of his enlistment in 2007. As a result, absent evidence of an error in the HOR recorded at the time of his...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2006 | 20060007330

    Original file (20060007330.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant requests, in effect, that he be given 11 years of constructive service credit. In addition, while the applicant was not given credit for his board certification, he was awarded 2-years constructive service credit for experience in unusual cases based on his board certification, based on his critical wartime specialty. To grant the applicant’s request would be giving him a benefit not provided to other officers.

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002071841C070403

    Original file (2002071841C070403.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein. The Board considered the following evidence: APPLICANT REQUESTS: That his undesirable discharge be upgraded to a general discharge.

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2003 | 2003086548C070212

    Original file (2003086548C070212.rtf) Auto-classification: Approved

    The applicant requests correction of item 44 (United States Citizen) on his DD Form 214 (Report of Separation from the Armed Forces of the United States) to show that he is a citizen of the United States. The applicant provided a Certificate of Citizenship, dated 12 March 1958, which shows that he became a naturalized citizen of the United States on 2 January 1941. Evidence of record shows the applicant became a naturalized citizen of the United States on 2 January 1941.

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | 20110018286

    Original file (20110018286.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    The ARCOTR may be awarded retroactively to those personnel who successfully completed AT or ADT on foreign soil in a Reserve status prior to 11 July 1984 provided they had an active status on or after 11 July 1984. c. the AFRM require that a minimum of 50 retirement points be earned for each of the 10 qualifying years and that the qualifying service be completed within 12 consecutive years. The evidence of record shows the applicant served in Korea during a qualifying period of service for...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2015_Navy | ND1500525

    Original file (ND1500525.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Types of Documents Submitted/reviewedRelated to Military Service: DD 214: Service/Medical Record: Other Records: Related to Post-Service Period: Employment: Finances: Education/Training: Health/Medical Records: Rehabilitation/Treatment: Criminal Records: Personal Documentation: Community Service: References: Department of VA letter: Other Documentation: Additional Statements: From Applicant: From/To Representation: From/To Congress member: Pertinent Regulation/Law A. Summary: After a...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2006 | 20060010845

    Original file (20060010845.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant submitted a letter from a friend who states the applicant worked for his father back in the early 1960's before the applicant started his own transmission service. There is no evidence that the applicant applied to the Army Discharge Review Board for upgrade of his discharge within its 15-year statute of limitations. The applicant's records were not available for the Board's review.