| Mr. Carl W. S. Chun | Director | |
| Mr. Edmund P. Mercanti | Analyst |
| Mr. Melvin H. Meyer | Chairperson | |
| Ms. Deborah S. Jacobs | Member | |
| Mr. Melvin H. Meyer | Member |
APPLICANT REQUESTS: That his reduction from pay grade E-4 to pay grade E-2 be voided.
APPLICANT STATES: After knee surgery and rehabilitative therapy in Long Beach, California, he flew to Connecticut to visit his family. On the last day of his leave, he was involved in a car accident in Ledyard, Connecticut, and taken to a local Naval hospital. He was treated for concussion and bruises and returned to his unit the following day. He contends that he was considered a deserter because of his top secret crypto security clearance, which he believes to be wrong.
EVIDENCE OF RECORD: The applicant's military records show:
He enlisted in the Regular Army on 9 September 1971. He was awarded the military occupational specialty of Morse code interceptor, and was promoted to pay grade E-4.
While stationed at Fort McArthur, California, the applicant was given a pass to go home for 26 and 27 March 1973. On 26 March 1973, the applicant was admitted to a Navy medical facility for treatment for a torn medial collateral ligament and detached medial meniscus. It was stated that the applicant injured himself playing baseball while sliding to a base. A line of duty investigation was conducted on that injury, and it was determined that it was incurred in line of duty.
On 1 August 1973, the applicant accepted nonjudicial punishment (NJP) under Article 15, Uniform Code of Military Justice, for being absent without leave (AWOL) from 3 to 24 July 1973. The punishment imposed consisted of a reduction from pay grade E-4 to E-3 (suspended for 90 days), and a forfeiture of $50.00 a month for two months.
On 20 August 1973, orders were published vacating the suspension of the applicant’s reduction in grade and the applicant was reduced. The reason the punishment was vacated is not contained in the applicant’s records.
On 24 October 1973, orders were issued reducing the applicant from pay grade E-3 to pay grade E-2. While these orders indicate that the reduction was a result of NJP, the NJP is not contained in the applicant’s records.
On 27 November 1973, the applicant was honorably discharged due to physical unfitness due to the injuries he incurred on 26 March 1973. His separation document shows that he was discharged in pay grade E-2. His separation document also shows that he was charged with lost time for the periods 11 and 12 November 1972; 4 through 23 July 1973; 14 August 1973; and 21 through 25 September 1973.
DISCUSSION: Considering all the evidence, allegations, and information presented by the applicant, together with the evidence of record and applicable law and regulations, it is concluded:
1. It is unclear exactly what transpired in the applicant’s case. Due to the time that passed between the date of injury (26 March 1973) and the beginning date of AWOL (3 July 1973), it is evident that the AWOL did not occur immediately following the injury. Possibly, the lapse of time can be explained if the AWOL in question occurred after the applicant’s reconstructive surgery and convalescent leave.
2. However, the applicant indicates that he was in an automobile accident on the last day of his leave, and returned to his unit the following day. This story is not in keeping with his acceptance of NJP for 22 days.
3. The applicant’s commander afforded him leniency by suspending his reduction in grade, a suspension which was later vacated. While the record does not contain documentation showing why the reduction in grade was vacated, it was probably due to his being AWOL on 14 August 1973.
4. But the applicant’s reduction for being AWOL in July 1973 was only one grade, from pay grade E-4 to pay grade E-3. He was reduced a second time in October 1973, probably due to his five days of AWOL in September 1973.
5. The applicant has a history of four periods of AWOL. He accepted NJP for these absences instead of demanding a trial by court-martial to prove his innocence. As such, the Board is presented a preponderance of evidence that the applicant was properly charged with AWOL and properly reduced in grade.
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
___dsj___ ____jam_ ____mhm DENY APPLICATION
| CASE ID | AR2002081963 |
| SUFFIX | |
| RECON | YYYYMMDD |
| DATE BOARDED | 20030520 |
| TYPE OF DISCHARGE | (HD, GD, UOTHC, UD, BCD, DD, UNCHAR) |
| DATE OF DISCHARGE | YYYYMMDD |
| DISCHARGE AUTHORITY | AR . . . . . |
| DISCHARGE REASON | |
| BOARD DECISION | DENY |
| REVIEW AUTHORITY | |
| ISSUES 1. | |
| 2. | |
| 3. | |
| 4. | |
| 5. | |
| 6. |
ARMY | BCMR | CY2004 | 20040001518C070208
Prior to the period of enlistment under review, the applicant served in the Army National Guard from 2 April 1977 to 6 August 1979 in military occupational specialty (MOS) 13B (Cannon Crewmember) until he was ordered to active duty on 6 August 1979 for 20 months and 11 days in pay grade E-2. The board recommended that the applicant be separated from the service because of misconduct with an UOTHC discharge. Army policy states that a UOTHC discharge is normally considered appropriate, but a...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002075367C070403
The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein. The convening authority suspended the reduction for 60 days. The discharge proceedings were conducted in accordance with law and regulations applicable at the time.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2004 | 20040004121C070208
Lawrence Foster | |Member | The Board considered the following evidence: Exhibit A - Application for correction of military records. THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE: 1. At the time of the applicant's separation, a UD was appropriate.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002080332C070215
The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein. On 26 January 1976, the applicant's commander advised the applicant of his rights and preferred charges against him for the AWOL offense. There is no evidence in the available records to show that the applicant ever applied to the Army Discharge Review Board for an upgrade of his discharge within that board's 15-year statute of limitations.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002081152C070215
The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein. Although the record of NJP is not present in the available records, his records contain an order showing that NJP was imposed against him again on 5 January 1971 for misconduct and that he was reduced to the pay grade of E-1 on that date. However, the applicant has failed to convince the Board through the evidence submitted or the evidence of record that his service is...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2003 | 2003087843C070212
EVIDENCE OF RECORD : The applicant's military records show: Army Regulation 635-200 provides that an honorable discharge is a separation with honor. Army Regulation 635-200, provides that a general discharge is a separation from the Army under honorable conditions.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2004 | 20040004671C070208
The applicant requests, in effect, that his Line of Duty Investigation (LODI), dated 23 January 1964, be corrected by changing the findings from "Not in the Line of Duty " to "In the Line of Duty." After recovering sufficiently from his injuries, he was given a medical evaluation board (MEB) which found him medically unfit for continued service and found his injuries occurred in the line of duty; the line of duty determination was erroneously based on the LODI from the applicant's 5 June...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002074439C070403
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. The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein. EVIDENCE OF RECORD : The applicant's military records show:
ARMY | BCMR | CY2005 | 20050005709C070206
The applicant provides the following documents in support of his application: Self-Authored Statement; Transfer to Inactive Army National Guard (ARNG) Orders; SSG/E-6 Promotion Orders; Administrative Reduction Orders; and Record of Proceedings Under Article 15, UCMJ (DA Form 2627). The evidence of record in this case confirms the applicant was promoted to SSG/E-6 on 28 May 1983, and that he satisfactorily served in that rank until being administrative reduced to SGT/E-5 on 5 May 1989, in...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002068664C070402
The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein. On 19 April 1977, the applicant was discharged, with a UOTHC discharge, under the above-cited regulation. Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations – Enlisted Personnel), paragraph 3-7 provides that an honorable discharge is a separation with honor.