| Mr. Carl W. S. Chun | Director | |
| Mr. W. W. Osborn, Jr. | Analyst |
| Ms. Celia L. Adolphi | Chairperson | |
| Mr. Melvin H. Meyer | Member | |
| Mr. John T. Meixell | Member |
APPLICANT REQUESTS: That his bad conduct discharge (BCD) be upgraded.
APPLICANT STATES: His BCD is inequitable because it is based upon a single incident in 59 months of service. In effect, he would appreciate being eligible for Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) compensation and treatment for his injuries, the loss of his right index finger and part of his thumb and attendant loss of range of motion in the hand and a left shoulder that was broken in five places. "Without an upgrade I will continue to endure pain as a part of these injuries." He received an honorable discharge after the accident, but the VA is basing the entire case on his last discharge. He also requests a personal hearing if his request is going to be denied.
EVIDENCE OF RECORD: The applicant's military records show:
On 7 June 1994, following 3 years in the Naval Junior Reserve Officer Training Course in high school, the applicant enlisted in the Regular Army for 6 years. He was awarded the Army Achievement Medal for his performance as an operations support technician at the Overhead Collection Management Center, National Security Agency for the period 15 September to 2 December 1995.
He was transferred to the Air Defense Artillery Center, Fort Bliss, Texas. On 22 August 1996 the applicant accidentally amputated his right index finger and part of his right thumb in a lawnmower. On 7 June 1997, he reenlisted for 6 years. He was awarded the Good Conduct Medal.
On 11 March 1998, before a general court-martial, the applicant pled guilty to wrongful appropriation of military property between 1 February and 6 August 1997; selling military property in excess of $100.00 value on or about 5 August 1997; between 1 February and 28 February 1997, unauthorized destruction or disposal of such property; and attempting to sell such property on or about 6 August 1997. The sentence consisted of reduction to pay grade E-1, total forfeitures, a BCD and 15 months confinement.
The convening authority approved the findings and sentence, but waived the forfeitures effective 26 March 1998 until 26 June 1998. The findings and sentence were affirmed upon review and the BCD was executed on 10 May 1999.
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. Trial by court-martial was warranted by the gravity of the offenses charged. Conviction and discharge were effected in accordance with applicable law and regulations, and the discharge appropriately characterizes the misconduct for which the applicant was convicted.
2. The overall quality of the applicant's service does not outweigh the offenses to which he pled guilty. Furthermore, the dates demonstrate that this was not "one incident."
3. There is no statutory or regulatory right to a formal hearing. The Board receives over 13,000 applications each year, but normally grants fewer than fifteen formal hearings a year. Formal hearings are granted only when the Board determines that a case is so complex, the records so incomplete, or that only sworn testimony can provide the necessary information.
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
__ CLA__ __MHM__ __JTM __ DENY APPLICATION
| CASE ID | AR2002071670 |
| SUFFIX | |
| RECON | |
| DATE BOARDED | 20020905 |
| TYPE OF DISCHARGE | BCD |
| DATE OF DISCHARGE | 19990510 |
| DISCHARGE AUTHORITY | |
| DISCHARGE REASON | |
| BOARD DECISION | (NC, GRANT , DENY, GRANT PLUS) |
| REVIEW AUTHORITY | |
| ISSUES 1. | 105.01 |
| 2. | |
| 3. | |
| 4. | |
| 5. | |
| 6. |
AF | PDBR | CY2013 | PD-2013-02596
The Board’s assessment of the PEB rating determinations is confined to review of medical records and all available evidence for application of the Veterans Affairs Schedule for Rating Disabilities (VASRD) standards to the unfitting medical condition at the time of separation. Right Thumb and Right Hand Condition . After due deliberation, considering all of the evidence and mindful of VASRD §4.3 (reasonable doubt), the Board recommends a TDRL placement disability rating of 30% and a TDRL...
A complete copy of the evaluation is attached at Exhibit C. The Chief, Inquiries/AFBCMR Section, AFPC/DPPPWB, also reviewed this application and states that the applicant has been advised through his servicing Military Personnel Flight (MPF) that he was not eligible to be promoted to airman until 11 February 1999, the day following the suspended discharge and will not be eligible for promotion to A1C until 11 December 1999 upon completion of the required 10 months (TIG) provided he...
AF | PDBR | CY2013 | PD2013 00373
The Service ratings for the unfitting left fifth digit amputation, left thumb pain due to scarring and right thumb pain due to scaring conditions is are addressed below; and, no additional conditions are within the DoDI 6040.44 defined purview of the Board.Any conditions or contention not requested in this application, or otherwise outside the Board’s defined scope of review, remain eligible for future consideration by the respective Service Board for Correction of Military Records. The CI...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2003 | 03096187C070212
The applicant states that there are no records of the injuries he sustained to his left hand, nor any records of his hearing problem. There are no medical records of his injuries. The Board further determined that the evidence presented is insufficient to warrant a portion of the requested relief.
NAVY | DRB | 2014_Navy | ND1400395
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1.The Applicant wants to use the GI Bill.2. Based on this significant misconduct, the NDRB determined the Applicant was fortunate that he did not receive a punitive Bad Conduct Discharge. ” Additional Reviews : After a document review has been conducted, former members are eligible for a personal appearance hearing, provided the application is received at the NDRB within 15...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2005 | 20050005716C070206
Army Regulation 635-204 (Personnel Separations Dishonorable and Bad- Conduct Discharge), paragraph 1b, provides that a bad conduct discharge will only be given to a pursuant approved sentence of a general or special court-martial imposing a bad conduct discharge. In accordance with Title 10, United States Code, section 1552, the authority under which this Board acts, the Army Board for Correction of Military Records is not empowered to set aside a conviction. However, good post service...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2001 | 2001062151C070421
When provided the same evidence submitted to the Physical Evaluation Board (PEB) for the same time period, the VA in July 2000 determined that he receive a 40 percent rating for his left arm with an overall rating of 50 percent. It is a fact finding board to investigate the nature, cause, degree of severity, and probable permanency of the disability of soldiers who are referred to the board; to evaluate the physical condition of the soldier against the physical requirements of the soldier’s...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080000777
On 29 May 2001, the Staff Judge Advocate, in a written review for the convening authority, summarized the evidence and trial discussion. General Court-Martial Order Number 279, United States Army Field Artillery Center and Fort Sill, Oklahoma, dated 14 November 2002, provided that the sentence to reduction to pay grade E-1, confinement for 18 months, and a bad conduct discharge, adjudged on 15 February 2001, had been affirmed. _ ___X____ ___ CHAIRPERSON I certify that herein is recorded...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2012 | 20120001952
The applicant requests an upgrade of his discharge. The applicant provides, in support of his application, medical records, excerpts from the record of trial, a letter from a female Soldier who served in the new unit with the applicant, a letter of support from a medical doctor, and medical literature about head injuries. The available evidence is insufficient to demonstrate that he was discriminated against or that his chain of command denied him medical treatment or support in handling...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | AR20140009921
The applicant requests, in effect, an upgrade of his bad conduct discharge (BCD) to a general, under honorable conditions discharge. 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. The evidence of record shows the applicant was convicted by a GCM and he received a BCD.