| Mr. Carl W. S. Chun | Director | |
| Mrs. Carolyn G. Wade | Analyst |
| Mr. John N. Slone | Chairperson | |
| Ms. Sherri V. Ward | Member | |
| Mr. Melvin H. Meyer | Member |
APPLICANT REQUESTS: Reconsideration of his earlier appeal to correct his military records by upgrading his discharge to general or honorable. He is also making an initial request that his narrative reason for discharge be changed to convenience of the government; that his reenlistment (RE) code be changed to RE code RE-1; and that his separation program number (SPN) be changed to correspond to his new narrative reason. The applicant requests a personal appearance before this Board.
APPLICANT STATES: In effect, that he was discriminated against because he would not smoke marijuana with his office mates. He states that his case was originally denied on 13 August 1981; that he has been instructed to provide new evidence; and that he is now providing new evidence to obtain a favorable decision. He states that he suffered abuse and discrimination by the United States Army clerks when his ticket was given to him to go to Fort Jackson, South Carolina. He believes the 467 days of lost time under United States Code 972 as well as the 431 days from 10 July 1969 thru 13 September 1970 are errors on his DD Form 214 (Armed Forces of the United States Report or Transfer or Discharge) and that he has only 2 legitimate days of lost time.
Counsel contends that the applicant's background and limited command of the English language could have possibly left him open to discrimination by other personnel. He states that the climate within the country and the military during the time the applicant served possibly provides a basis for the applicant's allegation of racial discrimination. He also states that the amount of AWOL time is incorrect and that it needs to be recalculated. He admits that he has no factual basis for any of his contentions.
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 on 5 August 1981 and again on 20 July 1994 (AC94-06578).
The applicant submits with his DD Form 149 (Application for Correction of Military Record) a copy of his DD Form 214 for the period ending 18 December 1970; a copy of a letter from the Salvation Army, dated 9 April 2001; and a copy of a certificate from the CAARR Institute certifying that he had successfully completed 90 hours of study in Social Model Theory and Practice.
The applicant’s submissions are new evidence and arguments that require Board consideration.
Army Regulation 15-185 sets forth the policy and procedures for the ABCMR. It provides that, if a request for 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 that was not in the record at the time of the Board’s prior consideration. This includes, but is not limited to, any facts or arguments as to why relief should be granted. 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 one 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 Board found no evidence that the applicant's chain of command acted in a discriminatory manner toward him or that he was treated differently because of his cultural background and limited use of the English language. Similarly, the applicant provided no corroborating evidence to support his contention.
2. The applicant's DD Form 214 reflects that he has 467 days of lost time and, after a careful review of the applicant's periods of AWOL, the Board determined that there is no error in the calculation of the number of days he was AWOL and that the 467 days of lost time is correctly reflected on his DD Form 214. The Board also noted that the breakdown of each period of AWOL in item 30 (Remarks) equaled the 467 days of lost time.
3. The applicant's administrative discharge was accomplished in compliance with applicable regulations with no indication of procedural errors that would tend to jeopardize his rights. The applicant was given an opportunity to appeal his pending separation; however, he declined to do so and submitted a waiver statement instead.
4. The Board noted that the applicant's DD Form 214 reflects the narrative reason for discharge as prolonged unauthorized absence for more than 1 year, with a SPN of 282 and a RE code of RE-4. The Board determined that his narrative reason for separation, his RE code of RE-4, and his SPN code of 282 are the appropriate codes for his narrative reason for discharge.
5. 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.
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
__jns___ __svw___ __mhm___ DENY APPLICATION
Carl W. S. Chun
| CASE ID | AR2002073381 |
| SUFFIX | |
| RECON | |
| DATE BOARDED | 20021119 |
| TYPE OF DISCHARGE | UD |
| DATE OF DISCHARGE | 19701218 |
| DISCHARGE AUTHORITY | AR 635-206 |
| DISCHARGE REASON | A92.31 |
| BOARD DECISION | Deny |
| REVIEW AUTHORITY | |
| ISSUES 1. | 144.9405 |
| 2. | |
| 3. | |
| 4. | |
| 5. | |
| 6. |
ARMY | BCMR | CY2012 | 20120004940
However, his record contains a duly-constituted DD Form 214 (Armed Forces of the United States Report of Transfer or Discharge) that shows he was discharged on 9 January 1970 under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-212 (Personnel Separations - Discharge - Unfitness and Unsuitability) by reason of unfitness with a character of service of under other than honorable conditions and issuance of an Undesirable Discharge Certificate. On 9 September 2009, the ABCMR addressed his medical issues...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080015226
The applicant's military records show that he enlisted in the Regular Army on 29 June 1974. When separation for unsuitability was directed, a general or honorable discharge was issued. However, there is no evidence that the applicant went AWOL during his first enlistment (except from 18 to 19 June 1975), which is the period of service being considered.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2015 | 20150000347
Counsel adds that: * the applicant was unaware that he had a legal issue pertaining to his separation (action) * he is currently in the hospital with cancer * he was not properly counseled as to the legal ramifications of a chapter 10 (in lieu of court-martial) * the applicant does not remember any paperwork associated with a chapter 10 discharge or meeting with an attorney * his record is void of the statement or request for discharge in lieu of court-martial that is required by the...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002075531C070403
APPLICANT REQUESTS : Reconsideration of his earlier request to the Army Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR) to upgrade his undesirable discharge. The staff of the Board is authorized to determine whether or not such evidence has been submitted. 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:
ARMY | BCMR | CY2004 | 20040000638C070208
The board determined that the applicant did wrongfully use marijuana, and recommended that he be discharged from the Illinois Army National Guard for misconduct with a General Discharge, with the stipulation that his discharge be suspended as the convening authority may determine. On 26 June 1995 the applicant appealed to the Army Discharge Review Board (ADRB) requesting that his discharge be upgraded to honorable and also requesting that he be reinstated [in the Army National Guard]. The...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2003 | 2003086036C070212
The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein. The only record available that is germane to this case is the above-cited order discharging the applicant on 11 August 1954 with an undesirable discharge. There is no evidence and the applicant has not provided any to indicate that his undesirable discharge was in error or that there was an injustice done to him.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | 20110018188
He performed the best he could under arduous conditions * He suffered prejudice and discrimination and his request should not be denied * He will not be eligible for veterans benefits without an upgrade of the discharge * After serving over 5 years he should have received a general or honorable discharge 3. Incorporated herein by reference are military records which were summarized in the previous consideration of the applicant's case by the Army Board for Correction of Military Records...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140016288
The applicant requests reconsideration of his earlier request for an upgrade of his under other than honorable conditions discharge. The applicant provides: * DD Form 214 (Report of Separation from Active Duty) * Statement regarding his absence * Letters to his next of kin * DA Form 2-1 (Personnel Qualification Record) * Army Discharge Review Board (ADRB) decision * DA Forms 4187 (Personnel Action) * Multiple post-service certificates and letters CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE: 1. The DD Form...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002080328C070215
The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein. The evidence of record shows that the applicant's period of service was terminated after completing 1 year, 10 months, and 4 days of creditable service, where he received an unsatisfactory conduct and efficiency rating, and had 2 days of lost time which was a disqualifying factor for award of the Good Conduct Medal. The evidence of record shows that the applicant's unit,...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140005769
Counsel requests, in effect, reconsideration of the applicant's previous request for remission/full administrative relief for a $10,000 officer accession bonus (OAB) he received and is now being recouped because a Federal recognition appointment was never extended to him. His service record does not indicate he was granted permanent Federal recognition for this appointment. As a result, the Board recommends that all State Army National Guard and Department of the Army records of the...