| Mr. Carl W. S. Chun | Director | |
| Mr. Jessie B. Strickland | Analyst |
| Mr. John N. Slone | Chairperson | ||
| Mr. Thomas D. Howard | Member | ||
| Mr. Thomas Lanyi | Member |
APPLICANT REQUESTS: In effect, the removal of 4 days of lost time from his report of separation (DD Form 214).
APPLICANT STATES: In effect, that he should not have been charged with 4 days of lost time due to excess leave because he did not take all of his required days of leave before reporting in on his first tour in Vietnam, two weeks before Thanksgiving and in his second tour, he remained in Vietnam 10 days past his expiration of term of service (ETS). He also states that he was on temporary duty during most of November 1969 from Fort Hood, Texas, and was being treated for back problems.
EVIDENCE OF RECORD: The applicant's military records show:
He enlisted on 22 June 1966 for a period of 3 years. He successfully completed his training and was transferred to Germany on 6 May 1967, for duty as a supplyman.
He was honorably discharged on 19 October 1967, for the purpose of immediate reenlistment. He reenlisted on 20 October 1967, for a period of 3 years and assignment to Vietnam. He departed Germany on 9 November 1967 and reported to Vietnam on 15 December 1967. He completed his tour in Vietnam on 14 December 1968 and was transferred to Fort Hood, Texas, on 4 February 1969.
On 14 April 1969, he was attached for duty at Fort Chaffee, Arkansas, where he remained in a temporary duty (TDY) status. On 6 May 1969, he submitted a request for reassignment to Vietnam. He remained at Fort Chaffee until he was returned to Fort Hood on 5 September 1969.
His request for assignment to Vietnam was approved and he departed Fort Hood on 25 October 1969. He arrived in Vietnam on 29 November 1969 and served there until 9 October 1970, when he departed for Oakland Army Base, California.
On 10 October 1970, he was honorably released from active duty (REFRAD) as an early overseas returnee. He had served 2 years, 11 months and 21 days of active service during his current 3-year enlistment and had a total of 4 years, 3 months and 18 days active service during his career. His DD Form 214 issued at the time of his REFRAD indicates that he had 4 days of lost time due to excess leave at the time of his separation. The period cited was 5 through 8 November 1969.
A review of the available records failed to show any indication of the facts and circumstances surrounding his excess leave, however, they do show that he was on leave en route to Vietnam during the period in question.
Army Regulation 635-5, in effect at the time, provided policy and procedures regarding leaves and passes. It provides that excess leave would only be granted upon the request of the soldier and that the request must contain a statement which ensures that soldiers are aware that all periods of excess leave are without pay and allowances. Excess leave is leave in excess of the amount that may be accrued during a soldier's current enlistment contract. That regulation also provides that leave management is an individual soldiers responsibility.
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. 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.
2. Although the Board does not have the applicant's finance records available to determine what his actual leave balance was at the time of his separation, the applicant has failed to show through the evidence submitted with his application or the evidence of record, that he was unjustly charged with 4 days of excess leave. Accordingly, absent evidence to the contrary, the Board must presume that what the Army did at the time was correct.
3. 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
__tdh ___ ____js___ ___tl ___ DENY APPLICATION
| CASE ID | AR23003084723 |
| SUFFIX | |
| RECON | YYYYMMDD |
| DATE BOARDED | 2003/07/22 |
| TYPE OF DISCHARGE | |
| DATE OF DISCHARGE | |
| DISCHARGE AUTHORITY | |
| DISCHARGE REASON | |
| BOARD DECISION | DENY |
| REVIEW AUTHORITY | |
| ISSUES 1. 252 | 121.0000/EXCESS LV ADJUST |
| 2. 189 | 110.0000/CORR 214 |
| 3. | |
| 4. | |
| 5. | |
| 6. |
ARMY | BCMR | CY2006 | 20060007761C071029
The evidence shows the applicant was inducted into the Army of the United States, on 8 January 1964. On 16 July 1965, the applicant and his unit were reassigned to Vietnam. The applicant, in a statement submitted on 16 July 1968, stated, in effect, he had returned from Vietnam on 15 December 1966, he had picked up his orders and he had been AWOL since that time.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2006 | 20060011670
There is no evidence showing the applicant applied to the Army Discharge Review Board requesting a change regarding the reason or character of service of his discharge within its 15-year statute of limitations. However, the individual would normally receive an undesirable discharge from the military service. Moreover, the evidence of record clearly shows that the applicant's overall quality of service during the period of service under review was not satisfactory.
ARMY | BCMR | CY1996 | 9608775C070209
He was in confinement from 7 August 1968 until 2 January 1969. On 16 September 1969 the applicants commanding officer recommended that the applicant be discharged for unfitness under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-212. He stated that he understood the nature and consequences of the undesirable discharge that he might receive.
ARMY | BCMR | CY1997 | 9709665
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 record also contains...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2003 | 2003085489C070212
The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein. On 25 October 1967, nonjudicial punishment (NJP) was imposed against him for being AWOL from 3 August to 18 August 1967. The ADRB determined that he had been properly discharged and denied his application on 8 August 1973.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002075015C070403
APPLICANT STATES : In effect, that he served 3 years, 11 months, and 19 days beyond his ETS date and that, upon being released from the United States Disciplinary Barracks (USDB), he should have been honorably discharged. On 30 May 1979, the unit commander recommended approval of the request for discharge under the provisions of chapter 10, Army Regulation 635-200 and the issuance of a discharge under other than honorable conditions. Accordingly, on 15 June 1979, the applicant was...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2001 | 2001060831C070421
Given his record of exemplary service, the Board finds that it would be in the interest of justice to award him the GCMDL for the period of 22 November 1965 to 21 November 1968. In view of the foregoing, the applicant’s records should be corrected as recommended below. That all of the Department of the Army records related to this case be corrected by awarding the individual concerned the GCMDL for the period of 22 November 1965 to 21 November 1968, the RVNGC w/Palm Unit Citation and the PUC.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2006 | 20060004654C070205
There are no orders in the applicant’s military service records that show he was awarded the Combat Infantryman Badge. There is no evidence in the applicant's military service records that shows he performed the principal duties of an infantryman or that he was assigned to an Army infantry unit in Vietnam. The evidence of record shows that the applicant was awarded primary MOS 11B (Infantryman) on 26 May 1967.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2006 | 20060007930C071029
The applicant requests, in effect, that his discharge be upgraded to a fully honorable discharge and that his rank and pay grade be restored to sergeant, E-5. The application submitted in this case is dated 28 May 2006 and was received for processing on 7 June 2006. Documents related to the applicant's discharge show that on 27 May 1970, the applicant voluntarily submitted a request for discharge for the good of the service under the provision of Army Regulation (AR) 635-200, Chapter 10.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2003 | 2003085487C070212
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...