Search Decisions

Decision Text

ARMY | BCMR | CY2004 | 040003950C070208
Original file (040003950C070208.doc) Auto-classification: Denied



                            RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


      IN THE CASE OF:


      BOARD DATE:        15 MARCH 2005
      DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20040003950


      I certify that hereinafter is recorded the true and complete record
of the proceedings of the Army Board for Correction of Military Records in
the case of the above-named individual.

|     |Mr. Carl W. S. Chun               |     |Director             |
|     |Mr. Kenneth H. Aucock             |     |Analyst              |


      The following members, a quorum, were present:

|     |Mr. Raymond Wagner                |     |Chairperson          |
|     |Mr. John Meixell                  |     |Member               |
|     |Mr. Jonathon Rost                 |     |Member               |

      The Board considered the following evidence:

      Exhibit A - Application for correction of military records.

      Exhibit B - Military Personnel Records (including advisory opinion,
if any).

THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE:

1.  The applicant requests reconsideration of his earlier appeal to correct
his  military records by upgrading his undesirable discharge.

2.  The applicant states that he is a master mason - a member of fraternal
organizations.  He was recommended for discharge because of unfitness.  He
is 56 years old and the Army stated that he did not have character
cleanliness and respect from 1 November 1968 to 29 May 1969.  It was wrong
what they did to him.

3.  The applicant provides a copy of a 13 February 2003 Department of
Veterans Affairs (VA) letter informing him that his military service does
not entitle him to  VA benefits, a copy of a letter from the grand
secretary of a fraternal organization stating that the applicant was a
member in good standing, copies of his separation processing documents and
related papers with his comments and questions attached thereto, and copies
of certificates showing his status in a fraternal organization.

COUNSEL'S REQUEST, STATEMENT AND EVIDENCE:

Counsel did not respond to a notification that the applicant’s records were
available for review.

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  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 (ABCMR) in Docket Number
AR2003094597, on 30 March 2004.

2.  The new evidence that the applicant submits are the above-mentioned VA
letter and the copies of certificates showing his status in a fraternal
organization.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant’s contentions are noted as is his good post-service
conduct as evidenced by his membership in a fraternal organization.  These
factors, however, do not warrant the relief requested.

2.  The applicant has submitted neither probative evidence nor a convincing
argument in support of his request.
BOARD VOTE:

________  ________  ________  GRANT FULL RELIEF

________  ________  ________  GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

___RW__  ___JM __  ___JR___  DENY APPLICATION

BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION:

The evidence presented does not demonstrate the existence of a probable
error or injustice.  Therefore, the Board determined that the overall
merits of this case are insufficient as a basis to amend the decision of
the ABCMR set forth in Docket Number AR2003094597, dated 30 March 2004.




                                  ____Raymond Wagner_______
                                            CHAIRPERSON



                                    INDEX

|CASE ID                 |AR20040003950                           |
|SUFFIX                  |                                        |
|RECON                   |YYYYMMDD                                |
|DATE BOARDED            |20050315                                |
|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.       |110.00                                  |
|2.                      |                                        |
|3.                      |                                        |
|4.                      |                                        |
|5.                      |                                        |
|6.                      |                                        |


-----------------------
[pic]


Similar Decisions

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2007 | 20070017210

    Original file (20070017210.TXT) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 18 March 2008 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20070017210 I certify that hereinafter is recorded the true and complete record of the proceedings of the Army Board for Correction of Military Records in the case of the above-named individual. The applicant’s DD Form 214 (Report of Separation from Active Duty) he was issued at the time of his discharge shows he was discharged on 27 September 1974, in accordance with chapter 10 of Army Regulation 635-200, with...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2006 | 20060001276C070205

    Original file (20060001276C070205.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant requests removal of General Officer Memorandum of Record (GOMOR) from his official military personnel file (OMPF) and reconsideration by a Special Selection Board (SSB) for promotion consideration to chief warrant officer three under the 2004 and 2005 criteria. The applicant contends that the DASEB denied his request for removal of the GOMOR and that prior to his second consideration by the chief warrant officer three promotion board he requested that the DASEB reconsider...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2005 | 20050017503C070206

    Original file (20050017503C070206.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 7 April 2004, the Chief, Command Sergeant Major/Sergeant Major (CSM/SGM) Branch notified the Commander of the 6th Battalion, 52nd Air Defense Artillery that the Department of the Army Enlisted Standby Advisory Board which adjourned on 20 February 2004, recommended removal of the applicant from the promotion list to sergeant major. The Chief, CSM/SGM Branch also stated that the Director of Military Personnel Policy, Army G-1 approved the Board's recommendation on 10 March 2004. Evidence...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2007 | 20070002697

    Original file (20070002697.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 5 June 2007 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20070002697 I certify that hereinafter is recorded the true and complete record of the proceedings of the Army Board for Correction of Military Records in the case of the above-named individual. Furthermore, whether to impose punishment and the nature of the punishment are the sole decisions of the imposing commander. The applicant has not provided any new evidence or substantiating argument that was not...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2003 | 03091984C070212

    Original file (03091984C070212.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    I certify that hereinafter is recorded the true and complete record of the proceedings of the Army Board for Correction of Military Records in the case of the above-named individual. The VA informed him that he could apply to the Army Discharge Review Board or this Board for relief. On 21 May 2003, in an unanimous opinion, the Army Discharge Review Board denied the applicant's request to upgrade his discharge, stating that the board did not grant relief solely for the purpose of gaining...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2005 | 20050000969C070206

    Original file (20050000969C070206.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    The evaluator went on to state that he evaluated the applicant on 1 April 2004 and found him to be fit for duty and deployable; however, since that time he had become more frustrated, angry and was making threats without plan. On that same date, the applicant was evaluated by a psychiatrist, a Doctor “K,” who stated that the applicant did not have a disabling mental disorder and was responsible for his actions. On 17 June 2004 the applicant’s commanding officer recommended to...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2005 | 20050000969C070206

    Original file (20050000969C070206.TXT) Auto-classification: Denied

    The evaluator went on to state that he evaluated the applicant on 1 April 2004 and found him to be fit for duty and deployable; however, since that time he had become more frustrated, angry and was making threats without plan. On that same date, the applicant was evaluated by a psychiatrist, a Doctor “K,” who stated that the applicant did not have a disabling mental disorder and was responsible for his actions. Nonetheless, there is no evidence, and the applicant has not submitted any, to...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2004 | 04105186C070208

    Original file (04105186C070208.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    The applicant was an active duty Soldier serving in pay grade E-4 when he was seriously wounded in action on 10 June 2003 while in Iraq. When the error was discovered, action was taken by the Board, at the applicant's request, to revoke the 10 June 2003 discharge action and restore him to an active status in order to preclude the applicant from having to pay back the difference between his active duty pay (roughly $2000.00 per month) and what he should have been receiving in...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2004 | 2004106620C070208

    Original file (2004106620C070208.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    The applicant’s military records are not available to the Board for review. Army Regulation 600-8-22 provides that the National Defense Service Medal is awarded for honorable active service for any period between 27 July 1950 through 27 July 1954, 1 January 1961 through 14 August 1974, 2 August 1990 through 30 November 1995, and 11 September 2001 to a date to be determined. Once the Korean War Service Medal has been authorized by the Department of the Air Force, the applicant may apply to...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2004-02456

    Original file (BC-2004-02456.DOC) Auto-classification: Denied

    _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The applicant reviewed the Air Force evaluation and states fraternization between officers and enlisted was prevalent at all levels in Rhein Main during that time period. After thoroughly reviewing the evidence of record, the Board is not persuaded to recommend upgrading the discharge. Exhibit B.