| Mr. Carl W. S. Chun | Director | |
| Mr. Kenneth H. Aucock | Analyst |
| Mr. Arthur A. Omartian | Chairperson | |
| Ms. Karen A. Heinz | Member | |
| Mr. Thomas Lanyi | Member |
2. The applicant, Mr. , U.S. Army (Retired), requests that American citizenship be granted his English daughter. However, on 4 April 2002, the applicant amended his application to request that his records be corrected to show that he had a dependent daughter while he was in the Army.
3. The applicant states that he was unaware of his daughter’s existence until 1999 when she contacted him. The reason he did not know of her existence was because her mother’s letters to him in Vietnam were returned to her unopened and unread by him because those letters had written across them, “MISSING IN ACTION.” After so many letters were returned, her mother assumed that he [the applicant] had been killed in action, so she stopped writing. The applicant encloses documents described herein.
4. The applicant’s military records show that he enlisted in the Army for three years on 28 October 1966, completed training, and in March 1967 was assigned to Germany with the 583d Ordnance Company. On 28 November 1967 orders were published directing him to report to Rhein/Main Air Base in Germany on 30 November 1967 for onward movement to Oakland, California and subsequent assignment to Vietnam. In February 1968 the applicant was assigned to Vietnam with the 5th Battalion, 60th Infantry, a 9th Infantry Division organization.
5. On 7 May 1968 the applicant was wounded in action. He was dropped from the strength of his unit on 9 May 1968. He was medically evacuated to the 106th General Hospital in Japan on 15 May 1968. On 22 May 1968 the applicant was reassigned to William Beaumont General Hospital in El Paso, Texas. On 2 October 1968 a Physical Evaluation Board determined that the applicant was physically unfit for military service and that he should be permanently retired with a 100 percent disability rating. The applicant was permanently retired on 4 November 1968.
6. In a 12 May 2000 statement, a Ms. stated that all correspondence with the applicant ceased in the early part of 1968, and that some letters sent to him prior to June 1968 were returned to her with “Missing in action” written on them. She stated that she was pregnant with his child, that she tried various ways to get in touch with him, to no avail, and assumed that he had been killed in action. Her daughter was born illegitimately in Germany, and they returned to England in 1969. In early 1984 her daughter was adopted by herself and her husband (surname ) in order that she gain British nationality to obtain a passport for a school trip. She stated that it was always assumed that the applicant was dead and no effort was made to contact him, until her daughter did so in 1999 and found him in New Mexico. It was neither her fault, her daughter’s fault, nor the applicant’s fault that there had been no contact. The American Army should have known where their soldiers were, and all correspondence to the applicant should have been delivered to him.
7. Attached to the statement by Ms. is a 2 March 2000 letter from a
Ms. , to a Member of Congress requesting assistance in obtaining American citizenship. She provides much of the same information as Ms. (her mother), implied that she located the applicant, and stated that she visited him in October 1999. She stated that American citizenship is important to her, and is her birthright. Attached to that letter is a copy of a certificate of birth showing that she was born to Ms. (then Ms. ) on 25 July 1968 in a British military hospital in Germany. Also attached is a copy of a paternity evaluation laboratory report, showing that DNA samples were collected from Ms. and from the applicant on 19 September 2000 and 18 August 2000, respectively. The testing agency concluded that the applicant could not be excluded as the biological father of
Ms. , and that based on the test results, the probability of paternity was 99.87 percent, as compared to an untested, random man of the North American Caucasian population. The agency stated that at least 99.71 percent of the North American Caucasian population was excluded from the possibility of being the biological father of Ms. .
8. In a July 2001 letter to a Member of Congress the applicant requested assistance in seeking American citizenship for Ms. , his daughter. He outlined the circumstances concerning his Army service, his daughter’s birth, and the attempts by her mother to locate himself. He stated that while he is responsible for his daughter being born illegitimate, he is not responsible for failing to legitimatize her and passing onto her American citizenship in 1968 when he could have done so. Her mother’s mail should have been forwarded to him. He stated that he would like to now rectify the situation, to do whatever is necessary to make his daughter an American citizen. The applicant provided a synopsis of his daughter’s present day life, her husband’s life, and his own life. He stated that a clerk’s error resulted in the cost of 31 years of a relationship with a child that he did not know existed.
9. Members of this agency reviewed daily situation reports, log reports, and unit morning reports of the 5th Battalion, 60th Infantry for 7 and 8 May 1968. There was no information indicating that the applicant was listed as “missing in action.” The unit morning report of 9 May 1968 did show that he was wounded in action on 7 May 1968 and evacuated.
CONCLUSIONS:
1. In all probability, the applicant, Mr. , is the biological father of Ms. . Consequently, the applicant’s record should reflect the fact that the applicant fathered Ms. , who was born on 25 July 1968, while Mr. was in the Army.
2. In view of the foregoing, the applicant’s records should be corrected as recommended below.
RECOMMENDATION:
That all of the Department of the Army records related to this case be corrected by showing that the applicant, Mr. , is the biological father of Ms. , who was born on 25 July 1968 during the time the applicant was in the Army.
BOARD VOTE:
__AAO__ __KAH __ __TL ___ GRANT AS STATED IN RECOMMENDATION
________ ________ ________ GRANT FORMAL HEARING
________ ________ ________ DENY APPLICATION
___Arthur A. Omartian___
CHAIRPERSON
| CASE ID | AR2001065554 |
| SUFFIX | |
| RECON | YYYYMMDD |
| DATE BOARDED | 20020730 |
| TYPE OF DISCHARGE | (HD, GD, UOTHC, UD, BCD, DD, UNCHAR) |
| DATE OF DISCHARGE | YYYYMMDD |
| DISCHARGE AUTHORITY | AR . . . . . |
| DISCHARGE REASON | |
| BOARD DECISION | GRANT |
| REVIEW AUTHORITY | |
| ISSUES 1. | 100.00 |
| 2. | 102.1 |
| 3. | |
| 4. | |
| 5. | |
| 6. |
ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100028188
The applicant requests her daughter be listed as the dependent of a deceased former service member (FSM). A male sponsor presents: (1) a court order that establishes paternity and the child's birth certificate, (2) an approved dependency determination as listed in paragraphs 4.9.2 and 4.10, or (3) a voluntary acknowledgement of paternity per Undersecretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness memorandum, dated 28 January 2008, subject: Determinations of Dependency for Health Care Benefits...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2003 | 03099542C070212
The applicant requests award of the Purple Heart, that his separation document be corrected to show that he is and was a United States citizen, and that his permanent mailing address on his separation document also be updated to reflect his current address. In the absence of more conclusive evidence that the applicant did in fact derive citizenship via one of his parents, there is no basis to correct that item on his separation document. The Board determined that administrative error in...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080013206
The applicant requests, in effect, that the record of the deceased former service member (FSM) who fathered her child be corrected to show her daughter is entitled to receive a Survivor Benefit Plan (SBP) annuity based on the death of the FSM. The FSM's record shows that on 15 October 2007, during his retirement processing, he completed a Data for Payment of Retired Personnel, in which he elected Children Only full SBP coverage. The ARBA legal advisor pointed out that under the 1972 SBP...
ARMY | BCMR | CY1997 | 199710726
A statement made by the mother of the female shows that she told the applicant that her daughter was 14 years old. DISCUSSION : Considering all the evidence, allegations, and information presented by the applicant, together with the evidence of record, applicable law and regulations, and advisory opinion, it is concluded: The evidence of record shows that during that period of time he also associated with friends of the female who were also minors.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140000857
On 1 July 2008, by letter, the VA notified the FSM's daughter, Melody, that a special review of the FSM's claims file was mandated by court. On 19 November 2013, by letter, DFAS notified the applicant that her claim for unpaid compensation from the FSM's military retired pay could not be paid due to the statute of limitations (Title 31, U.S. Code, section 3702). As a result, the Board recommends that all Department of the Army records of the individual concerned be corrected by showing the...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140000857 (3)
On 1 July 2008, by letter, the VA notified the FSM's daughter, Melody, that a special review of the FSM's claims file was mandated by court. On 19 November 2013, by letter, DFAS notified the applicant that her claim for unpaid compensation from the FSM's military retired pay could not be paid due to the statute of limitations (Title 31, U.S. Code, section 3702). As a result, the Board recommends that all Department of the Army records of the individual concerned be corrected by showing the...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140000857
On 1 July 2008, by letter, the VA notified the FSM's daughter, Melody, that a special review of the FSM's claims file was mandated by court. On 19 November 2013, by letter, DFAS notified the applicant that her claim for unpaid compensation from the FSM's military retired pay could not be paid due to the statute of limitations (Title 31, U.S. Code, section 3702). As a result, the Board recommends that all Department of the Army records of the individual concerned be corrected by showing the...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2015 | 20150004008
The applicant requests correction of his records to show his name as Oscar (no middle initial (NMI)) G____. The applicant's birth certificate shows his name as Oscar G____ R____. The form shows the applicant's mother's maiden name as his "English" surname with his father's surname being used as a middle name, R____, Oscar G____.
ARMY | BCMR | CY1997 | 199710726C070209
The document shows the statement 99.99 percent of falsely accused men would be excluded as the father by the above tests. The CID Report also shows, in various statements made by four females (ages 14, 14, 15,and16 at the time), that the applicant had assaulted a minor female by punching her in the stomach with a closed fist; that he engaged in consensual sexual intercourse with another minor (15-year old) female; and that he assaulted a minor female by grabbing her breast. The applicant...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100008003
Item 7 of the applicant's DD Form 214 shows he was not a U.S. citizen at the time of his separation. Therefore, the Board determined that the overall merits of this case are insufficient as a basis for correction of the records of the individual concerned. _______ _ X_______ ___ CHAIRPERSON I certify that herein is recorded the true and complete record of the proceedings of the Army Board for Correction of Military Records in this case.