| Mr. Carl W. S. Chun | Director | |
| Mr. Gerald E. Vandenberg | Analyst |
| Ms. Irene N. Wheelwright | Chairperson | |
| Mr. Hubert O. Fry, Jr. | Member | |
| Mr. Donald P. Hupman, Jr. | Member |
APPLICANT REQUESTS: Reconsideration of his application to correct his records by upgrading his discharge.
APPLICANT STATES: In effect, he is a changed man since his discharge. He is giving much of his spare time and efforts to his church and community. He would like to continue his education to further improve his life and the lives of others.
NEW EVIDENCE OR INFORMATION: Incorporated herein by reference are military records which were summarized in the decisional document prepared to reflect the Board's previous consideration of the case (AR2001056245) on 14 June 2001.
The applicant submits four letters written in support of his application that show his involvement in his community and church.
The applicant’s submissions are new evidence that require Board consideration.
A letter from the applicant’s city councilman describes him as a hard working, dependable and trustworthy individual. The letter from his church describes him as a loving, dedicated and devoted man who is an inspiration to the young people in his church. The letter from the Jewish Community Center, where the applicant is a coach, describes him as a dedicated, trustworthy and dependable man who goes out of his way to help the children. The letter from the Department of Veterans Affairs, Veterans Benefit Counselor describes the applicant as a friendly, mature, well-mannered, high-energy person who is well liked in the community.
Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel. Chapter 14 establishes policy and prescribes procedures for separating members for misconduct. Specific categories include minor disciplinary infractions, a pattern of misconduct, commission of a serious offense, convictions by civil authorities, desertion or absence without leave.
Army Regulation 15-185 sets forth the policy and procedures for the ABCMR. It provides that, if a request for a reconsideration is received within one year of the prior consideration and the case has not been previously reconsidered, it will be resubmitted to the Board if there is evidence (including but not limited to any facts or arguments as to why relief should be granted) that was not in the record at the time of the Board’s prior consideration. The staff of the Board is authorized to determine whether or not such evidence has been submitted.
The regulation provides further guidance for reconsideration requests that are received more than 1 year after the Board’s original consideration or after the Board has already reconsidered the case. In such cases, the staff of the Board will review the request to determine if substantial relevant evidence has been submitted that shows fraud, mistake in law, mathematical miscalculation, manifest error, or if there exists substantial relevant new evidence discovered contemporaneously with or within a short time after the Board’s original decision. If the staff finds such evidence, the case will be resubmitted to the Board. If no such evidence is found, the application will be returned without action.
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 non-judicial punishments that led to the applicant’s discharge were imposed in compliance with applicable laws, regulations and policies. The punishments imposed were neither unjust nor disproportionate to the offense, and there is no evidence of any violation of any of the applicant's rights.
2. The discharge proceedings were conducted in accordance with law and regulations applicable at the time. The character of the discharge is commensurate with the applicant's overall record of military service.
3. The letters attesting to the applicant’s good character and post-service adjustment and conduct are noted, but they are insufficient as the sole basis for relief because they do not appear to outweigh the repeated misconduct that led to the applicant’s separation.
4. The overall merits of the case, including the latest submissions and arguments, are insufficient as a basis for the Board to reverse its previous decision.
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
_INW____ __HOF _ __DPH___ DENY APPLICATION
Carl W. S. Chun
| CASE ID | AR2001061218 |
| SUFFIX | |
| RECON | |
| DATE BOARDED | 20020115 |
| TYPE OF DISCHARGE | |
| DATE OF DISCHARGE | |
| DISCHARGE AUTHORITY | |
| DISCHARGE REASON | |
| BOARD DECISION | DENY |
| REVIEW AUTHORITY | |
| ISSUES 1. | 110.00 |
| 2. | |
| 3. | |
| 4. | |
| 5. | |
| 6. |
ARMY | BCMR | CY2001 | 2001055119C070420
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. 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: However, neither the applicant’s explanation nor the doctor’s opinion overcomes the fact that there is no record of treatment for the hand...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2001 | 2001058549C070421
He reports that “…a number of witness who could sustain the facts in favor of Captain [the applicant] who were never interviewed or given the opportunity to testify….” He recommends “in the strongest terms” that the applicant be re-appointed as a captain with longevity and all benefits. It provides that, if a request for a reconsideration is received within one year of the prior consideration and the case has not been previously reconsidered, it will be resubmitted to the Board if there is...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002071779C070403
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. Another letter to the VA...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2001 | 2001061424C070421
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: The statement attributed to MSG M____ relates various personnel problems with individuals within the company and with the company commander but it does not directly provide any information that mitigates the applicant's behavior. However, they are not supported by either evidence submitted with the...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002077524C070215
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. APPLICANT REQUESTS : Reconsideration of his earlier request to the Army Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR) to upgrade his discharge from undesirable to an honorable discharge. Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 3-7, provides that a general discharge is a separation from the Army under honorable conditions.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002068023C070402
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 staff of the Board is...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2003 | 2003085707C070212
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. APPLICANT REQUESTS :Reconsideration of his earlier appeal to correct his military records by changing the separation authority, separation code, reentry code, and the narrative reason for his discharge. In an 11 September 2003 letter to the Board, he states that he did receive acts of valor and achievement awards.
ARMY | BCMR | CY1997 | 9705212A
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 | CY2001 | 2001053635C070420
He further contended that the 1995 non-selection should not be considered a passover because Paragraph 2-4d of Army Regulation 135-155 provides that, ”Nonselection for promotion under this paragraph does not constitute a passover.” It provides that, if a request for a reconsideration is received within one year of the prior consideration and the case has not been previously reconsidered, it will be resubmitted to the Board if there is evidence (including but not limited to any facts or...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2001 | 2001058976C070421
APPLICANT STATES : In effect, that a 28 March 1952 letter from the FSM’s division commander substantiates that he was entitled to the Combat Infantryman Badge. The submitted letter is new evidence that requires Board consideration. 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: