Search Decisions

Decision Text

ARMY | BCMR | CY2004 | 20040010071C070208
Original file (20040010071C070208.doc) Auto-classification: Denied



                            RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


      IN THE CASE OF:


      BOARD DATE:        16 August 2005
      DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20040010071


      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             |
|     |Ms. Deyon D. Battle               |     |Analyst              |


      The following members, a quorum, were present:

|     |Mr. Melvin H. Meyer               |     |Chairperson          |
|     |Mr. John T. Meixell               |     |Member               |
|     |Mr. James B. Gunlicks             |     |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 that his Certificate of Release or Discharge (DD
Form 214) be corrected to show that he completed 2 years and 3 months of
net active service.

2.  The applicant states, in effect, that his DD Form 214 erroneously
reflects that he had 1 year, 3 months and 7 days of net active service.

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

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  On 26 September 2001, he enlisted in the Army in Richmond, Virginia,
for 3 years, in the pay grade of E-1.  He successfully completed his
training as an infantryman.

2.  Nonjudicial punishment (NJP) was imposed against the applicant on
1 August 2002 for being absent without leave (AWOL) from 18 July until 19
July 2002; for being AWOL from 20 July until 26 July 2002; and for being
disrespectful in language toward a senior noncommissioned officer on 19
July 2002.  His punishment consisted of restriction and extra duty.  His
records show that when he was apprehended on 19 July 2002, he was placed in
pretrial confinement.

3.  On 31 October 2002, the applicant provided a urine specimen for drug
testing. The testing was conducted at the Tripler Army Medical Center,
Forensic Toxicology Drug Testing Laboratory and the results of his
urinalysis were positive for marijuana metabolites.

4.  The applicant went AWOL on 1 November 2002 and the remained absent
until he was apprehended by civil authorities on 17 November 2002.

5.  The available records show that he AWOL again 10 December 2002 and he
remained absent in desertion until 12 June 2003.

6.  On 9 July 2003, the applicant was notified that he was being
recommended for discharge under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200,
chapter 14, based on misconduct.  He acknowledged receipt of the
notification on 15 July 2003.  After consulting with counsel, he submitted
a conditional waiver of his rights contingent upon his not having any
offenses referred against him to a court-martial.

7.  The appropriate authority approved the recommendation for discharge on
31 July 2003.  Accordingly, on 7 August 2003, the applicant was discharged,
under other than honorable conditions, under the provisions of Army
Regulation 635-200, chapter 14-12C(2), as a result of misconduct, based on
abuse of illegal drugs.  He had completed 1 year, 3 months and 18 days of
net active service and he had approximately 202 days of lost time due to
AWOL and confinement.

8.  The Department of Defense Military Pay and Allowances Entitlements
Manual provides the criteria for creditable and non-creditable service.  It
provides, in pertinent part, that an unauthorized absence of more than 1
day (24 consecutive hours) that is not administratively excused as
unavoidable, is not creditable service.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant had three separate incidents of AWOL while he was in the
Army.  He also was placed in pretrial confinement once when he was
apprehended during one of his AWOL incidents.  The lost time currently
reflected on his DD Form 214 amounts to approximately 202 days and in
accordance with the Department of Defense Military Pay and Allowances
Entitlements Manual, his unexcused absences are not creditable service.

2.  Although he entered the Army on 26 September 2001 and was not
discharged until 7 August 2003; he did not serve while he was AWOL.
Therefore, it would be unfair to credit him with service he did not
perform.

3.  His DD Form 214 fails to show his lost time for the period covering 20
July 2002 until 26 July 2002.  However, the Board will not amend his DD
Form 214 to add additional lost time.  It is not the policy of this Board
to make an applicant worse off than what he was prior to submitting an
application.

4.  In order to justify correction of a military record the applicant must
show 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.

5.  In view of the foregoing, there is no basis for granting the
applicant’s request.






BOARD VOTE:

________  ________  ________  GRANT FULL RELIEF

________  ________  ________  GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

__mhm___  __jtm___  __jbg___  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 for correction of the
records of the individual concerned.




                                        Melvin H. Meyer
                                  ______________________
                                            CHAIRPERSON



                                    INDEX

|CASE ID                 |AR20040010071                           |
|SUFFIX                  |                                        |
|RECON                   |                                        |
|DATE BOARDED            |20050816                                |
|TYPE OF DISCHARGE       |                                        |
|DATE OF DISCHARGE       |                                        |
|DISCHARGE AUTHORITY     |                                        |
|DISCHARGE REASON        |                                        |
|BOARD DECISION          |DENY                                    |
|REVIEW AUTHORITY        |                                        |
|ISSUES         1.  189  |110.0000/DISCHARGE DOCUMENT             |
|2.  260                 |123.0000/LOST TIME                      |
|3.  261                 |123.0100/AWOL                           |
|4.                      |                                        |
|5.                      |                                        |
|6.                      |                                        |


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


Similar Decisions

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2004 | 2004100523C070208

    Original file (2004100523C070208.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE: 1. The applicant's military personnel records show the applicant was inducted into the Army of the United States on 10 June 1970 for a period of 2 years and was assigned to Fort Jackson, South Carolina for basic combat training (BCT). Accordingly, on 21 June 1971, the applicant was discharged with a UD.

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2003 | 2003084956C070212

    Original file (2003084956C070212.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 Board notes the applicant’s contention that his Merchant Marine service from 6 September 1944 through 2 February 1945 should be considered active duty service for retired pay computation purposes. The law did not authorize this service to be creditable for retired pay computation purposes.

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2004 | 20040007163C070208

    Original file (20040007163C070208.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant, as the wife of the deceased former service member (FSM), requests, in effect, that clemency in the form of an upgrade to his discharge be granted. When the FSM returned, he was discharged with a dishonorable discharge. The FSM’s military records are not available to the Board for review.

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2003 | 2003084845C070212

    Original file (2003084845C070212.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein. There is no indication in the available records that the applicant suffered from any psychological disorders at the time of discharge. The applicant's voluntary request for separation under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-208, chapter 10, for the good of the service, to avoid trial by court-martial, was administratively correct and in conformance with applicable...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2001 | 2001057282C070420

    Original file (2001057282C070420.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein. On 29 May 1971, he departed this unit in an AWOL status and remained absent until 7 July 1971 when he was returned to military control at Fort Polk, Louisiana. Chapter 10 of that regulation provides, in pertinent part, that a member who has committed an offense or offenses for which the authorized punishment includes a punitive discharge may, at any time after the charges...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2001 | 2001051384C070420

    Original file (2001051384C070420.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein. On 29 May 1971, he departed this unit in an AWOL status and remained absent until 7 July 1971 when he was returned to military control at Fort Polk, Louisiana. Chapter 10 of that regulation provides, in pertinent part, that a member who has committed an offense or offenses for which the authorized punishment includes a punitive discharge may, at any time after the charges...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2003 | 2003088587C070403

    Original file (2003088587C070403.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. APPLICANT REQUESTS: In effect, that his bad conduct discharge (BCD) be upgraded to a more favorable discharge.

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2004 | 20040004291C070208

    Original file (20040004291C070208.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    Pertinent Army Regulations provide that prior to discharge or release from active duty, individuals will be assigned RE codes, based on their service records or the reason for discharge. He has provided no evidence or basis for changing these codes. There is no evidence that the applicant was any less mature than other soldiers of the same age who successfully completed their military service obligation.

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002073389C070403

    Original file (2002073389C070403.rtf) Auto-classification: Approved

    The examining psychiatrist noted that the applicant was eligible for separation under Army Regulation 635-209, but was considered cleared psychiatrically for any administrative disposition deemed appropriate by his command. On 2 October 1962 the company commander initiated action to administratively discharge the applicant with a general discharge under Army Regulation 635-209. Thereafter, the type of discharge and the character of service were to be determined solely by the individual's...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002080332C070215

    Original file (2002080332C070215.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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.