MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION


         IN THE CASE OF:
        


         BOARD DATE: 11 September 2001
         DOCKET NUMBER: AR2001057503

         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
Mr. David E. Weightman		Senior Analyst

The following members, a quorum, were present:

Mr. Celia L. Adolphi		Chairperson
Mr. Curtis L. Greenway		Member
Mr. Donald P. Hupman, Jr.		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: Compensation for loss of pay between pay grade E-2 and E-4 from February 1962 to February 1964, which should include his inactive Reserve service from February 1959 to February 1961. He also requests addition of his Good Conduct Medal (GCMDL), foreign service time and schooling shown on his U.S. Air Force DD Form 214 (Armed Forces of the United States Report of Transfer or Discharge) to be shown on his Army DD Form 214. He also requests correction of his DA Form 20 (Enlisted Qualification Record) to show his proper assignments and rank.

APPLICANT STATES: His reduction in rank was not valid with connotations of conspiracy and racism. Entries on his DA Form 20 concerning his assignments and rank have been altered, written over and inaccurately listed, possibly fraudulently. No one should violate a man’s human rights without cause, our constitution demands justice, and the military fights to preserve, protect and defend it. He states that over the years the trauma of that injustice has created emotional insecurity, self doubt and the “Blame the Victim” syndrome. Together we need to address this situation and correct it. He needs to know someone did something to him and we did something about it. He needs closure, compensation and justice. He submits copies of his records and a comprehensive statement in support of his request.

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

The applicant was born on 18 March 1937.

He was enlisted for 4 years and served on active duty in the Regular U.S. Air Force from 24 June 1955 to 26 February 1959. He received low speed radio operator schooling (Airborne Radio School) and served as a communications center specialist. He received an honorable discharge as an Airman Second Class (pay grade E-2) and was transferred to the U.S. Air Force Reserve. He was credited with 3 years, 8 months and 3 days of total service, and 1 year,
4 months and 3 days of foreign service (Germany). He received a GCMDL.

He was honorably discharged from the U.S. Air Force Reserve effective
13 February 1961 in pay grade E-2.

He was enlisted in the Regular Army for 3 years on 14 February 1961, at Fort Thomas, Kentucky. He enlisted for pay grade E-2 and assignment in Europe.

He received basic combat training at Fort Knox, Kentucky, and radio teletype operator training at Fort Gordon, Georgia. He was awarded that military occupational specialty (MOS), code 053.10.



He was promoted to private first class, pay grade E-3, effective 22 June 1961.

He arrived in Germany on 3 October 1961 and was assigned to the 24^th Aviation Company for the duration of his overseas tour. He served in MOS code 053.10.

On 18 January 1962 he was advised by his commander of his proposal to impose punishment upon him under Article 15, Uniform Code of Military Justice unless he demanded trial by court-martial. The commander stated it was reported to him that the applicant disobeyed a lawful order of a non-commissioned officer to sweep and clean a floor on or about 1600 hours,
11 January 1962, and that on or about 0600 hours, 18 January 1962, he was absent from reveille without authority.

The applicant responded to his commander on the same date. He acknowledged receipt of the commander’s proposal. He stated that trial by court-martial was not demanded, and that no matters in mitigation, extenuation or defense are submitted.

On the same date the applicant’s commander reduced him to private, pay grade E-2. He advised the applicant of his appeal rights.

On the same date the applicant acknowledged the reduction and stated he did not appeal the punishment.

The applicant was reduced to private, pay grade E-2 effective 18 January 1962.

The applicant was promoted to private first class, pay grade E-3 effective
15 March 1963.

While assigned to the 24^th Aviation Company he received conduct and efficiency ratings of excellent except for the period of 27 February to 17 August 1963 when he received ratings of good.

He was returned from Germany based on the expiration of his term of service and he was honorably discharged as a private first class, pay grade E-3, on
6 February 1964. He was credited with 2 years, 11 months and 23 days of service for this period, and foreign service in Europe of 2 years, 4 months and
12 days.

His DA Form 20 and DA Form 24 (Service Record) both show his assignment and promotion and reduction history. They are original forms without changes or deletions.


Army Regulation 635-5, Separation Documents, in effect at the time, prescribes the policy and procedures for preparation of separation documents, including the DD Form 214. The regulation specifies that the DD Form 214 will show the foreign service completed, awards received, and military schooling completed during the period of service covered.

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 is not entitled to correction of his records to show his pay grade as E-4, and he is not due compensation for loss of pay between pay grade E-2 and E-4 from February 1962 to February 1964, including his inactive Reserve service from February 1959 to February 1961. He is also not entitled to an addition of his GCMDL, foreign service time or schooling shown on his Air Force DD Form 214 to be shown on his Army DD Form 214. He is also not entitled to a correction of his DA Form 20 concerning his assignments and rank.

2. All of his contentions have been noted; however, they are not supported by his application or the evidence of record. His records clearly show he did not attain the rank of specialist four or pay grade E-4 or that he lost compensation. His records also clearly show his highest grade was private first class, pay grade E-3, and that he was properly reduced by his commander for misconduct to private, pay grade E-2. He has not shown conspiracy or racism concerning his reduction. At the time of the reduction the applicant acknowledged the action and elected not to demand trial by court-martial or to submit matters in mitigation or extenuation in his defense, or to appeal the punishment.

3. His records also clearly show his assignment and promotion history, without changes, deletions, alterations or fraud as he has alleged, and he has not shown otherwise.

4. Pertinent regulations clearly show that foreign service completed, awards received, and military schooling completed during the period of service covered are shown on the DD Form 214 for that period of service. His Army and Air Force DD Forms 214 appear correct concerning these items.

5. 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.




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

_cla____ _dph____ _clg____ DENY APPLICATION

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

---

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2001057503
SUFFIX
RECON
DATE BOARDED	20010911
TYPE OF DISCHARGE
DATE OF DISCHARGE
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY
DISCHARGE REASON
BOARD DECISION	DENY
REVIEW AUTHORITY
ISSUES 1.	131.00
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.