Search Decisions

Decision Text

ARMY | BCMR | CY2001 | 2001056617C070420
Original file (2001056617C070420.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied
MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION


         IN THE CASE OF:
        


         BOARD DATE: 28 August 2001
         DOCKET NUMBER: AR2001056617

         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. Joyce A. Wright Analyst


The following members, a quorum, were present:

Mr. John N. Slone Chairperson
Mr. Donald P. Hupman Member
Mr. Richard T. Dunbar 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: That his leave from 14 June to 23 July 1993 not be charged to him because he did not take it.

APPLICANT STATES: That he was charged for leave from 14 June to 23 July 1993 which he did not take while on active duty. In support of his application he submits a copy of his DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty).

EVIDENCE OF RECORD: The applicant's military records show he enlisted on 9 April 1991 as a military policeman.

The applicant’s records contain a copy of a US Total Army Personnel Command (PERSCOM) Message, dated 20 May 1993, to the Commander of Fort Knox, Kentucky, subject: Curtailment and Reassignment of the applicant. The message stated that the applicant should be advised that his application for reassignment was reviewed by the DA Compassionate Review Board and was not favorably considered. The message also stated that the problems presented were certainly difficult and unfortunate. However, the applicant’s father had chronic medical problems, which were not resolvable during the period, for which curtailment and stabilization were authorized. The message further stated that the applicant could remain attached to Fort Knox until 14 June 1993, and that this attachment was permissive.

The applicant’s record contains a copy of a memorandum from Headquarters,
US Army Armor Center and Fort Knox, dated 3 June 1993, subject: Request
For Hardship Discharge, which was signed by the Adjutant General. The memorandum stated that the applicant’s request for separation by reason of hardship, submitted by the applicant, was approved under the provisions of
Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 6.

On 14 June 1993, the applicant requested excess leave pending administrative discharge proceedings. He also stated, in his request, that he understood that periods of excess leave were without pay and allowances, which included entitlement to physical disability retired pay should he become disabled while in an excess leave status, and that no leave accrues during periods of excess leave. The applicant’s request was approved on the same day. The approval memorandum also noted that all accrued leave would be used prior to the start of the excess leave status.

Accordingly, the applicant was discharged on 23 July 1993 under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 6-3b, for hardship. He had a total of
2 years, 3 months, and 15 days of creditable service.



Item 18 (Remarks) of his DD Form 214 shows the entry “”EXCESS LEAVE (CREDITABLE FOR ALL PURPOSES EXCEPT PAY AND ALLOWANCES):
40 DAYS, 930614 TO 930723.”

Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel. Chapter 6 of that regulation provides, in pertinent part, for
the separation of personnel because of genuine dependency or hardship. An
application for such separation will be approved when a service member can substantiate that his/her situation or immediate family's situation has been aggravated to an excessive degree since enlistment, that the condition is not temporary, and that discharge will improve the situation.

Paragraph 6-3b, provides for the separation due to hardship. A hardship
exists when, in circumstances not involving death or disability of a member of the soldier’s (or spouse’s) immediate family, separation from the service will
materially affect the care or support of the family by alleviating undue and genuine hardship.

Army Regulation 630-5, in effect at that time, prescribed polices and procedures
governing leaves and passes. Paragraph 5-2 pertained to excess leave. It stated, in pertinent part, that excess leave may be granted in emergencies (chap 6) or unusual circumstances. The aggregate of all leave granted normally will not exceeded 60 days for any one period of absence. The aggregate of leave granted includes accrued plus advance (to include the unaccrued portion of advance leave previously granted) plus excess leave and that excess leave will be granted only upon request of the soldier. It also stated that the request must contain a statement which ensures soldiers are aware that periods of excess leave are without pay and allowances, that no leave accrues to soldiers during periods of excess leave, and that there is no entitlement to physical disability retired pay should the soldier incur a physical disability while in an excess leave status.

Paragraph 5-5 of the same regulation, provided for excess leave awaiting administrative discharge. It stated that the General Court-Martial authority, or his or her designee, may authorize soldiers awaiting completion of administrative discharge proceedings, an indefinite period of excess leave upon their request. This option may be used when excess leave would be in the best interest of the unit to which the soldier is attached. Leave granted must not interfere with timely processing or separation. Soldiers who have been granted leave while awaiting administrative discharge, will be charged with ordinary leave until accrued leave is exhausted.




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 Board notes the applicant’s contention that he was charged for leave from 14 June to 23 July 1993 which he did not take while on active duty.
However, the evidence of record clearly shows that he voluntarily requested excess leave pending administrative discharge without pay and allowances in accordance with applicable regulations.

2. The Board also notes that the applicant stated in his request that he understood that periods of excess leave are without pay and allowances, which includes entitlement to physical disability retired pay should he become disabled while in an excess leave status, and that no leave accrues during periods of excess leave. The Board further notes that the applicant’s request for excess leave was approved and that he departed on excess leave on 14 June 1993
until 23 July 1993, the date of his discharge.

3. The evidence of record also shows that the applicant was administratively discharged on 23 July 1993, in accordance with Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 6, for hardship.

4. 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 this requirement.

5. 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

__js___ ___dh___ ___rd_____ DENY APPLICATION



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



INDEX

CASE ID AR2001056617
SUFFIX
RECON
DATE BOARDED 20010828
TYPE OF DISCHARGE HD
DATE OF DISCHARGE 19930723
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY AR 635-200, C 6
DISCHARGE REASON
BOARD DECISION DENY
REVIEW AUTHORITY
ISSUES 1. 252
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.

Similar Decisions

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2006 | 20060008724

    Original file (20060008724.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    The applicant concludes by stating that, he exhausted his leave and should not be charged for leave after 12 July 2005 because he continued to report to his chain of command and the unit's administrative support staff, as ordered, and if he had been ordered or instructed to report to the unit's armory during this period he would have done so; however, this was not the case. c. Separation Leave Records: Request for Payment of Accrued Leave, dated 24 August 2005, that shows, in pertinent...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2013 | 20130014937

    Original file (20130014937.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    The applicant requests that his DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) be corrected by adding the entry “Hardship Discharge” to the narrative reason for his separation. This provision of law also allows the Army Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR) to excuse an applicant's 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. Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002082703C070215

    Original file (2002082703C070215.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 7 December 1998, the applicant's commander initiated action to separate the applicant for involuntary separation due to parenthood under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 5-8. The applicant’s DD Form 214 indicates in block 15a that she did not contribute to the Post-Vietnam ERA Veteran’s Educational Assistance Program. The evidence of record confirms that the applicant was honorably discharged on 6 January 1999, under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002079455C070215

    Original file (2002079455C070215.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2013 | 20130007158

    Original file (20130007158.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    The applicant requests correction of his DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) to show the correct separation authority and separation code. The applicant states he was discharged in accordance with Army Regulation 635-200 (Active Duty Enlisted Administrative Separations), not Army Regulation 635-40 (Physical Evaluation for Retention, Retirement, or Separation). SPD code "MDA" was the correct code for Soldiers separating under the provisions of paragraph 6-3b...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090004075

    Original file (20090004075.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    BOARD DATE: 23 JULY 2009 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20090004075 THE BOARD CONSIDERED THE FOLLOWING EVIDENCE: 1. Paragraph 6-3 of Army Regulation 635-200 states that Soldiers of the Active Army and the Reserve Components may be discharged or released because of genuine dependency or hardship. Evidence of record shows the applicant requested a hardship discharge.

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080001922

    Original file (20080001922.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The evidence of record clearly shows that the applicant requested to be discharged under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 6, paragraph 6-3a for financial hardship. Orders were published assigning the applicant to Fort Jackson, South Carolina, for his final outprocessing, with a reporting date and discharge date to be announced. The evidence shows the orders were published by Fort Dix, New Jersey, discharging the applicant from the Regular Army effective 2 February 1979.

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002065885C070402

    Original file (2002065885C070402.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein. However, there is no evidence in the available records to show that he requested PTDY prior to his transition leave. The applicant had accrued 63 days of leave at the date of his release from active duty and used 72 days of leave as stated on his Statement of Military Leave Account, and incurred a debt of 10 days of excess leave.

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | 20110015750

    Original file (20110015750.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    However, his duly-constituted DD Form 214 shows he was honorably released from active duty on 29 March 2006 under the provisions of paragraph 6-3b of Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations) by reason of hardship. a. Paragraph 6-3 states that Soldiers on active duty may be discharged or released because of genuine dependency or hardship. c. Paragraph 6-6 (Application for Separation) states the Soldier must request, in writing, separation from the Service because of dependency or hardship.

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2013 | 20130012850

    Original file (20130012850.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    A memorandum, undated, contained in the applicant's military personnel file, shows the applicant requested a hardship discharge due to the premature birth of her daughter. It states that the SPD code MDG is the appropriate code to assign to Soldiers separated under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 6-3b(1), by reason of parenthood. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS: The evidence of record shows the applicant was separated due to hardship, but the specific reason for the...