Search Decisions

Decision Text

ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100030195
Original file (20100030195.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

		IN THE CASE OF:	  

		BOARD DATE:	  19 July 2011

		DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20100030195 


THE BOARD CONSIDERED THE FOLLOWING EVIDENCE:

1.  Application for correction of military records (with supporting documents provided, if any).

2.  Military Personnel Records and advisory opinions (if any).


THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE:

1.  The applicant requests correction of his military records to show that he had enrolled in the Direct Deposit Program (DDP) and to be paid the money he had saved.

2.  The applicant states that when he went to the Republic of Vietnam (RVN), he signed up for the DDP wherein he had deposited all but $25.00 of his monthly pay during the period from January 1968 to May 1970.  He subsequently had a long hospital stay and assignments to West Germany and Fort Belvoir, Virginia.  His finance records were lost in transit.  

3.  The applicant further states that when he left West Germany, he signed papers reporting his poor pay and was told to get on the jet and that his pay would be straightened out at Fort Dix, New Jersey.  It was not straightened out.  He received a little over $200.00 separation pay.  Within 7 days of getting back to his parent's home in Virginia, he went to Fort Belvoir where he signed some more papers to find his lost pay.  He was told to be patient because his records were still in transit.  Every few months he would check in with the main pay office, always with the same reply.  In 1974 he moved to Los Angles, California.  The pay office [location not remembered by applicant] told him that his pay records had burned up in the 1973 warehouse fire.  

4.  The applicant claims that he lost more than $100.00 a month for 18 months, not to mention all of his temporary duty pay and 42 years of accrued interest.  

5.  The applicant contends that he attached copies of pay records and medical records with his application; however, they were not received by the analyst.  A letter from the Deputy Director, Defense Finance and Accounting Service (DFAS), dated 18 October 2010, with enclosure, was received.

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  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 also allows the Army Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR) to excuse an applicant’s failure to timely file within the 3-year statute of limitations if the ABCMR determines it would be in the interest of justice to do so.  While it appears the applicant did not file within the time frame provided in the statute of limitations, the ABCMR has elected to conduct a substantive review of this case and, only to the extent relief, if any, is granted, has determined it is in the interest of justice to excuse the applicant’s failure to timely file.  In all other respects, there are insufficient bases to waive the statute of limitations for timely filing.

2.  The available military personnel records show the applicant:

	a.  enlisted in the Regular Army on 9 August 1967;

	b.  was awarded  military occupational specialty 36K (Wireman);

	c.  arrived in the RVN on or about 7 February 1968;

	d.  was wounded as a result of enemy action on 23 May 1968;

	e.  was evacuated to the 106th General Hospital in November 1968;

	 f.  was assigned as a switchboard operator at Fort Belvoir on 4 February 1969;

	g.  was assigned as a senior message clerk with the 83rd Field Artillery Regiment in Europe on 16 October 1969;

	h.  was released from active duty at Fort Dix, New Jersey, on 30 July 1970; and

	i.  had attained the rank of specialist four, pay grade E-4, and had completed 2 years, 11 months, and 22 days of creditable active duty service.

3.  The applicant's finance records were not available for review.

4.   The letter, dated 18 October 2010, received with the applicant's application indicates that it was written to a U.S. Senator on behalf of the applicant.  The Deputy Director, DFAS, states that official disbursing records are not available for the period January 1968 through July 1970; therefore, personnel at DFAS are unable to verify the applicant's direct deposit payments.  The author further states that the applicant's claim had accrued on 30 July 1970.  In the event that DFAS were able to obtain the official disbursing records, the Barring Act of 1940 prevents payment of any claim because more than 6 years has passed since 1970.  A copy of the 1940 Barring Act was enclosed with this letter.

5.  The legal "Doctrine of Laches" bars a claimant from receiving relief where the claimant's delay in pursuing the claim has operated to the prejudice of the opposing party.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant contends that his military records should be corrected to show he had enrolled in the DDP and should now be paid the money he had saved.

2.  The applicant's Army finance records are no longer available for review.  Also, the Army disbursing records for the period of the applicant's active duty service are no longer available for review.  Furthermore, the applicant has not provided any documentary evidence showing that he had participated in the DDP, or that he had initiated an inquiry at the time of his release from active duty, or that he had made a continual pursuit of his lost pay.

3.  Regrettably, due to the passage of time pertinent information has been lost or destroyed; therefore, favorable consideration of the applicant's request is barred by the doctrine of laches.

4.  In view of the foregoing, the applicant's request should be denied.

BOARD VOTE:

________  ________  ________  GRANT FULL RELIEF 

________  ________  ________  GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF 

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

___X___  ___X____  ____X___  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.




      __________X______________
                 CHAIRPERSON
      
I certify that herein is recorded the true and complete record of the proceedings of the Army Board for Correction of Military Records in this case.



ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20100030195





3


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20100030195



4


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

Similar Decisions

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | 20110016262

    Original file (20110016262.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    BOARD DATE: 17 April 2012 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20110016262 THE BOARD CONSIDERED THE FOLLOWING EVIDENCE: 1. The applicant requests reconsideration of his request to show correction of his military records to show he had enrolled in the direct deposit program and to be paid any monies owed to him regardless of his missing payroll records and the 1940 Barring Act. Incorporated herein by reference are military records, which were summarized in the previous consideration of the applicant's case by...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | 20110025088

    Original file (20110025088.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    The applicant requests, in effect: * payment of back retired pay of about $474,093.88 plus interest from 1980 to the present * removal of the DD Form 1300 (Report of Casualty) from his records * removal of any documentation related to his death from his pay records * determination of why the Defense Finance and Accounting Service (DFAS) stopped his retired pay without notice * determination of why DFAS officials stopped working his claim and using the excuse that his issue was being handled...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | 20110014230

    Original file (20110014230.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant states, in effect: a. the 2 June 2011 Army Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR) decision was and is a fraud. The applicant provides: * U.S. District Court for the District of New Jersey document, dated 14 July 1966 – this document was previously considered by the Board * Two newspaper articles * VA Form 21-4138 (DVA Statement in Support of Claim), dated 28 June 2011 * Letters, dated 15 August 2011, 21 July 2011, 15 July 2011, 24 June 2011, and 24 August...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140016339

    Original file (20140016339.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    He argues that he did not discover the error until 1987 when he discussed the allotments with his father and was told that none of them had ever been received. He acknowledges that his father received a letter, dated 21 October 1988, from the U.S. Army Finance and Accounting Center (USAFAC) stating it had been determined that none of the checks had been cashed and had been replaced. The applicant contends, in effect, that his military records should be corrected to show entitlement to...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | 20110002820

    Original file (20110002820.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    It also shows he was promoted to SP4 on 6 December 1968, the highest rank he attained while serving on active duty and he held this rank until he was reduced to PFC for misconduct on 22 August 1969. The evidence of record also confirms the applicant was granted de facto status during the period he erroneously held the rank of SGT from 5 November 1970 to 22 November 1972. Based on the applicant's erroneous promotion to SGT and lacking evidence to corroborate the applicant's claim he did not...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2013 | 20130014040

    Original file (20130014040.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 3 April 2014 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20130014040 THE BOARD CONSIDERED THE FOLLOWING EVIDENCE: 1. The applicant requests correction of his DD Form 214 (Armed Forces of the United States Report of Transfer or Discharge) to show his rank and pay grade as sergeant (E-5) instead of specialist four (E-4). The available evidence shows that the applicant was notified on 15 April 1970 of his selection for promotion to sergeant, pay grade E-5 and his subsequent assignment to an...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2006 | 20060000185C070205

    Original file (20060000185C070205.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant requests that he be paid interest on the money he deposited to the Soldiers Savings Program. The applicant has failed to show through the evidence submitted with his application or the evidence of record that he did not receive the benefits he was authorized to receive in conjunction with the Savings Deposit Program. Records show the applicant should have discovered the alleged error or injustice now under consideration on 13 June 1971; therefore, the time for the applicant...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | 20110013849

    Original file (20110013849.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant states: * he served as tunnel rat in Vietnam because of his height and weight * he feels he was underpaid for the position * he was unable to submit a claim to the Defense Finance and Accounting Service (DFAS) in a timely manner due to his physical and mental condition as a result of his service in Vietnam 3. 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...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140019845

    Original file (20140019845.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Application for correction of military records (with supporting documents provided, if any). The applicant requests correction of his military records by showing he was not absent without leave (AWOL) from 25 February through 8 March 1971. On 22 March 1971, the applicant accepted nonjudicial punishment (NJP) for being AWOL from 25 February through 8 March 1971 (12 days).

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100021773

    Original file (20100021773.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    His DD Form 47 (Record of Induction) shows he was in the custody of the law at the time he was inducted into the Army of United States. Paragraph 5-5b of the same regulation states that an individual claiming erroneous induction because of a procedural right as provided by the Military Selective Service Act of 1967 may submit a request for release from custody and control of the Army. The available evidence shows he was charged with a Selective Service violation on 15 June 1966, for...