RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
IN THE CASE OF:
BOARD DATE: 18 August 2005
DOCKET NUMBER: AR20050000746
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. Beverly A. Young | |Analyst |
The following members, a quorum, were present:
| |Mr. James Vick | |Chairperson |
| |Mr. Ronald Weaver | |Member |
| |Mr. Robert Rogers | |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 correction of his total military service.
2. The applicant states his total time was 4 months and 11 days and he
should be eligible for benefits. He states, in effect, that a mistake has
been made because he served 181 days.
3. The applicant provides no documents in support of his application.
CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:
1. The applicant is requesting correction of an alleged error which
occurred on 16 August 1979. The application submitted in this case is
dated 16 June 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 limitations 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. The applicant enlisted in the U.S. Army Reserve under the delayed
enlistment program on 30 March 1979 for six years. His DD Form 4
(Enlistment or Reenlistment Agreement) shows he enlisted in the Regular
Army on 11 July 1979 for a period of three years.
4. On 16 August 1979, the applicant was honorably discharged from active
duty under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 5-33,
Trainee Discharge Program.
5. His DD Form 214 shows he entered active duty on 11 July 1979 and
completed 1 month and 6 days active military service during this period.
6. Item 18d shows he completed 3 months and 11 days prior inactive
service.
7. Item 18e (Total Service for Pay) on his DD Form 214 shows he completed
a total of 4 months and 17 days total service for pay purposes.
8. Army Regulation 635-5 (Separation Documents) governs the preparation of
the DD Form 214. In the version in effect at the time, it states that the
DD Form 214 is a synopsis of the Soldier's most recent period of continuous
active duty. It provides a brief, clear-cut record of active Army service
at the time of release from active duty, retirement or discharge. In
pertinent part it stated that all service shown in 18(a) through 18(f)
would be less time lost under Title 10, United States Code, section 972 and
time lost subsequent to expiration of term of service.
DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:
1. The applicant's enlistment contract shows he enlisted in the U.S. Army
Reserve on 30 March 1979 and entered active duty service on 11 July 1979.
2. The applicant was discharged from active duty on 16 August 1979. His
DD Form 214 properly reflects that he completed a total 4 months and 17
days total service to include 1 month and 6 days active duty service and 3
months and 11 days prior inactive service.
3. There appears to be no error or injustice in this case regarding the
applicant's total military service. Therefore, there is no basis for
granting his request.
4. Records show the applicant should have discovered the alleged error or
injustice now under consideration on 16 August 1979; therefore, the time
for the applicant to file a request for correction of any error or
injustice expired on 15 August 1981. 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
JV______ RW______ RR______ 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.
James Vick____________
CHAIRPERSON
INDEX
|CASE ID |AR20050000746 |
|SUFFIX | |
|RECON |YYYYMMDD |
|DATE BOARDED |20050818 |
|TYPE OF DISCHARGE |(HD, GD, UOTHC, UD, BCD, DD, UNCHAR) |
|DATE OF DISCHARGE |YYYYMMDD |
|DISCHARGE AUTHORITY |AR . . . . . |
|DISCHARGE REASON | |
|BOARD DECISION |DENY |
|REVIEW AUTHORITY |Mr. Chun |
|ISSUES 1. |100.0000 |
|2. | |
|3. | |
|4. | |
|5. | |
|6. | |
-----------------------
[pic]
ARMY | BCMR | CY2005 | 20050001769C070206
He was discharged on 25 May 1971 for immediate reenlistment. He was discharged on 26 May 1977 for immediate reenlistment. The applicant reenlisted on 27 May 1977.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2005 | 20050001769C070206
He was discharged on 25 May 1971 for immediate reenlistment. He was discharged on 26 May 1977 for immediate reenlistment. The applicant reenlisted on 27 May 1977.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2006 | 20060000740C070205
On 8 November 1979, after consulting with counsel, the applicant submitted a request for discharge for the good of the service under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200 (Enlisted Personnel Separations), chapter 10, in lieu of trial by court-martial. The applicant’s record is void of the separation authorities approved request of the applicant's discharge and issuance of an under other than honorable conditions discharge from the Army. The evidence of record shows the applicant had...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2004 | 040003330C070208
The applicant’s service in the DEP is not active duty service. There were no provisions for a separate entry on the DD Form 214 showing time spent on the DEP when he was discharged in 1983, nor is there now a requirement to enter that information for Soldiers who do not have a military service obligation when they are separated from the Army. Consequently, the applicant’s request to correct his DD Form 214 is denied.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2007 | 20070015030
On 25 June 1979, the applicant was discharged, in pay grade E-1, under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 10, for the good of the service with a discharge under other than honorable conditions. Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 3-7b, provides that a general discharge is a separation from the Army under honorable conditions. His discharge packet is not available; however, in the absence of evidence to the contrary it is presumed that the discharge proceedings were conducted...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2007 | 20070015030
Effective 20 June 1978, the applicant was honorably discharged from the Army National Guard and ordered to involuntary active duty for 21 months and 6 days for failure to satisfactorily participate in required unit training. On 25 June 1979, the applicant was discharged, in pay grade E-1, under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 10, for the good of the service with a discharge under other than honorable conditions. Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 3-7b, provides that a...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2004 | 2004100456C070208
The Board considered the following evidence: Exhibit A - Application for correction of military records. On 31 January 1978, the commander initiated separation action on the applicant under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 5, expeditious discharge. Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2006 | 20060004036C070205
THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE: 1. He had completed 6 years, 2 months, and 8 days of active military service during the period under review. On 10 September 1982, the Army Discharge Review Board (ADRB), by unanimous vote, denied the applicant’s request for an upgrade of his discharge.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2004 | 20040008093C070208
The available evidence does support correcting the applicant's DD Form 214, issued on 31 October 1979 to show he was authorized award of: a. Evidence shows that the applicant’s records contain administrative error which does not require action by the Board. Therefore, the Board requests that the CMSD-St. Louis administratively correct the DD Form 214 issued to the applicant on 31 October 1979 to show award of: a.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2005 | 20050017325C070206
James R. Hastie | |Member | The Board considered the following evidence: Exhibit A - Application for correction of military records. The applicant requests, in effect, that the entries at item 12 (Record of Service) on his 6 January 1984 DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) be completed. The applicant states that the DD Form 214 does not reflect his period of active duty from 28 March 1980 through 11 February 1983.