Search Decisions

Decision Text

ARMY | BCMR | CY2004 | 20040008966C070208
Original file (20040008966C070208.doc) Auto-classification: Denied



                            RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


      IN THE CASE OF:


      BOARD DATE:                              13 OCTOBER 2005
      DOCKET NUMBER:         AR20040008966


      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. Jessie B. Strickland          |     |Analyst              |

      The following members, a quorum, were present:

|     |Mr. Ted Kanamine                  |     |Chairperson          |
|     |Mr. Patrick McGann                |     |Member               |
|     |Ms. Carol Kornhoff                |     |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, in effect, that he be promoted to the pay grade
of E-4.

2.  The applicant states that he did not receive his promotion to the pay
grade of E-4 in connection with his reenlistment and reenlistment bonus.

3.  The applicant provides no additional documents in support of his
application.

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  The applicant is requesting correction of an alleged error which
occurred on 29 November 1971.  The application submitted in this case is
dated 30 June 2004 and was received on 20 October 2004.

2.  Title 10, U.S. Code, Section 1552(b), provides that applications for
correction of military records must be filed within 3 years after discovery
of the alleged error or injustice.  This provision of law allows the Army
Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR) to excuse failure to file
within the 3-year statute of limitation if the ABCMR determines that it
would be in the interest of justice to do so.  In this case, the ABCMR will
conduct a review of the merits of the case to determine if it would be in
the interest of justice to excuse the applicant’s failure to timely file.

3.  He enlisted in Oklahoma City, Oklahoma, on 28 September 1970 for a
period of 3 years.  He completed his basic combat training at Fort Leonard
Wood, Missouri, and his advanced individual training (AIT) at Fort Sill,
Oklahoma, before being transferred to Augsburg, Germany in the pay grade of
E-3, on 9 March 1971, for duty as a cannoneer.

4.  On 28 May 1971, he reenlisted for a period of 3 years and assignment to
Vietnam.  There is no evidence in his reenlistment contract that he was
contracted for or was eligible for a reenlistment bonus, or that he was
promised a promotion in connection with his reenlistment.

5.  The applicant departed Germany en route to Vietnam with a reporting
date to the Fort Lewis, Washington, overseas replacement company of 28 June
1971.  He failed to report as ordered and remained in an absent without
leave (AWOL) status until he was apprehended and returned to military
control at Fort Sill, Oklahoma on 18 August 1971.  He was transferred to
Fort Hood, Texas, to be placed in confinement.

6.  There is no evidence in the available records to show that he ever
received any punishment for that AWOL offense.  However, his records do
show that he was transferred to Brooke Army Medical Center, Fort Sam
Houston, Texas, where he was diagnosed with a Schizophrenic reaction,
paranoid, acute, severe, manifested by feelings of persecution, attacks on
other people without provocation, suspiciousness, and poor reality testing.
 The examining psychiatrist recommended that he be processed for separation
through medical channels.

7.  He underwent a medical evaluation board (MEB) which opined that the
applicant was medically unfit for military service, that he was not suited
for duty in Vietnam, and that he did not wish to continue his service.  The
MEB recommended that he be referred to a Physical Evaluation Board (PEB).

8.  On 21 October 1971, a PEB also found him unfit for further military
service and recommended that he be separated from the service with
severance pay with a 10% disability rating.  The applicant concurred with
the findings of the PEB and waived a formal hearing in his case on 22
October 1971.

9.  Accordingly, he was honorably discharged in the pay grade of E-3 on
29 November 1971, under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-40, due to
Physical Disability, with entitlement to severance pay.  He had served 1
year, 2 months, and 2 days of total active service and received $622.20 in
disability severance pay benefits.

10.  A review of the applicant’s records fails to show any evidence to
reflect that he was promised, in connection with his reenlistment, that he
was going to be promoted or that he was recommended for promotion to the
next higher grade.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

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.  The applicant has failed to show through evidence submitted with his
application or the evidence of record that he was entitled to or was
promised that he would be promoted and was unjustly denied the promotion.

3.  Therefore, lacking evidence to show that he was unjustly denied a
promotion to which he was entitled, there appears to be no basis to grant
his request.
4.  Records show the applicant should have discovered the alleged error or
injustice now under consideration on 29 November 1971; therefore, the time
for the applicant to file a request for correction of any error or
injustice expired on 28 November 1974.  However, the applicant did not file
within the 3-year statute of limitations and has not provided a compelling
explanation or evidence to show that it would be in the interest of justice
to excuse failure to timely file in this case.

BOARD VOTE:

________  ________  ________  GRANT FULL RELIEF

________  ________  ________  GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

____TK_    ___PM __  ___CK__  DENY APPLICATION

BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION:

1.  The Board determined that 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
for correction of the records of the individual concerned.

2.  As a result, the Board further determined that there is no evidence
provided which shows that it would be in the interest of justice to excuse
the applicant's failure to timely file this application within the 3-year
statute of limitations prescribed by law.  Therefore, there is insufficient
basis to waive the statute of limitations for timely filing or for
correction of the records of the individual concerned.




            ____Ted Kanamine______________
                    CHAIRPERSON




                                    INDEX

|CASE ID                 |AR20040008966                           |
|SUFFIX                  |                                        |
|RECON                   |YYYYMMDD                                |
|DATE BOARDED            |20051013                                |
|TYPE OF DISCHARGE       |(HD)                                    |
|DATE OF DISCHARGE       |19721129                                |
|DISCHARGE AUTHORITY     |AR 635-40                               |
|DISCHARGE REASON        |Physical Disability – Severence Pay     |
|BOARD DECISION          |(DENY)                                  |
|REVIEW AUTHORITY        |AR 15-185                               |
|ISSUES                  |310/PROMOTION                           |
|1.131.0000              |                                        |
|2.                      |                                        |
|3.                      |                                        |
|4.                      |                                        |
|5.                      |                                        |
|6.                      |                                        |


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


Similar Decisions

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002079330C070215

    Original file (2002079330C070215.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 | CY2009 | 20090001079

    Original file (20090001079.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant's military personnel records contain a DD Form 149 (Application for Correction of Military or Naval Record Under the Provision of Title 10, U.S. Code, Section 1552), dated 12 December 1985, that shows the applicant requested to be medically retired at a higher percentage of disability due to his chronic osteomyelitis and other residuals of his gunshot wound. The applicant contends, in effect, his records should be corrected to show he was promoted to the grade of CPT (O-3) and...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2015 | 20150000960

    Original file (20150000960.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    Specifically, the applicant requests correction of his DD Form 214 (Armed Forces of the United States Report of Transfer or Discharge) to show in: * block 23a (Specialty Number and Title), his military occupational specialty (MOS) as "Field Illumination Crew Chief" * block 24 (Decorations, Medals, Badges, Commendations, Citations, and Campaign Ribbons Awarded or Authorized), he was awarded the Bronze Star Medal * block 25 (Education and Training Completed), he graduated from the...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090017271

    Original file (20090017271.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant requests correction of his records to show he was medically retired or retained on active duty and given a physical profile. The DA Form 199, block 13 (Election of Soldier) shows that on 22 July 2002 the applicant concurred with the PEB's findings and recommendations and waived his right to a formal hearing of his case. Army Regulation 635-40, paragraph 4-19 states when a Soldier has a rating of less than 30 percent and has at least 20 qualifying years for retirement for...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | 20110013715

    Original file (20110013715.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant requests correction of his DD Form 214 (Armed Forces of the United States Report of Transfer or Discharge) to show that he: * was discharged in the rank/grade of specialist four/E-4 * entered active duty in “September 1971” * completed basic combat training (BCT) at Fort Ord, California * completed advanced individual training (AIT) at Fort Sill, Oklahoma * was injured in Vietnam 2. The applicant's DD Form 214 already shows he completed AIT. _______ _ X_______...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2005 | 20050007351C070206

    Original file (20050007351C070206.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant states that his DD Form 214 shows his rank and pay grade as private first class (PFC), E-3, but he was a SP4, E-4 at the time of his discharge. Headquarters, 75th Field Artillery Group, Special Orders Number 29 dated 29 January 1971 authorized the applicant separate rations. Headquarters, U.S. Army Field Artillery Center and Fort Sill, Special Orders Number 223, dated 11 August 1971 released the applicant from active duty on 27 August 1971 in the rank of PFC.

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2004 | 20040010787C070208

    Original file (20040010787C070208.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    The last entry on the applicant’s records regarding promotions show that his records were forwarded to the E- 7 promotion selection board on 10 July 1991. However, the applicant has failed to show through the evidence submitted with his application or the evidence of record that such was the case. It is also noted that from the time the applicant served under the 1SG in question in 1984, he served an additional 8 years and would have been considered by selections boards every year until...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2003 | 03097903C070212

    Original file (03097903C070212.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Board considered the following evidence: Exhibit A - Application for correction of military records. THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE: 1. In January 1970 the applicant departed Vietnam and was assigned to Fort Sill, Oklahoma.

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2007 | 20070001168

    Original file (20070001168.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant requests, in effect, that his military records be corrected to show he was permanently retired. On 17 February 1994, the applicant was notified by mail that records show he failed to report for his periodic physical examination during September 1992. Evidence of record shows the applicant was counseled on 8 August 1991 and informed of the requirement for periodic medical examinations while on the TDRL.

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2001 | 2001065903C070421

    Original file (2001065903C070421.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein. Department of the Army, Headquarters, United States Army Field Artillery Center and Fort Sill, Fort Sill, Oklahoma, Special Orders Number 340 reflects that the applicant was discharged by board action under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200 for the good of the service with a UD. It states that an honorable discharge is a separation with honor.