Search Decisions

Decision Text

ARMY | BCMR | CY2012 | 20120021583
Original file (20120021583.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

		IN THE CASE OF:	  

		BOARD DATE:	  9 July 2013

		DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20120021583 


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, in effect, remission/cancellation of a valid debt resulting from his court-martial conviction. 

2.  The applicant states:

	a.  He never received the amount of money that is in question.  He was in Korea for 3 years and 6 months and he can't find most of his records.  He was in the Army for 6 to 8 months after his scheduled date of return from overseas (DEROS) which should not have happened in the first place.  He signed a power of attorney over to his section sergeant at the time he went into custody.  He never received his personal belongings, totaling $2,000 from Korea.  Given the overall situation, he believes he was taken advantage of.  He was not paid the money that the Defense Finance and Accounting Service (DFAS) official states he owes and he paid all his fines and penalties while in confinement.  He was told on two occasions this issue was fixed back in 2006 and 2007.  

	b.  He can prove beyond a doubt that he never got paid from 2002 through his DEROS date.  If he had been paid, he never received this money.  He has some documents to support what transpired.  He contacted DFAS on two occasions and he was told the debt was a mistake.  It was fixed in 2007 and he thought it was fixed for good.  However, in May 2011, he received a letter stating he owes the money.  

3.  The applicant provides:

* DFAS-IN Form 0-641 (Statement of Military Pay Account)
* DFAS letter, dated what appears to be 13 June 2012
* Letter from a creditor/collection agency
* DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty)
* Self-authored letter to DFAS - Dispute Department
* Letter from the U.S. Army Human Resources Command - St. Louis
* Letter from the National Personnel Records Center
* Letter from the U.S. Army Legal Services Agency
* Orders 086-0162 (separation orders)
* Letter from the Department of Treasury
* Self-authored letter to the Military Court of Appeals
* DA Form 4187 (Personnel Actions)
* Defense Counsel Statement of the Case
* Congressional correspondence
* IRS Form 1040 (U.S. Individual Income Tax Return - 2005) and 2005 W-2
* IRS Form 1040A (U.S. Individual Income Tax Return - 2006 and allied documents
* North Carolina Individual Income Tax Return - 2006
* Correspondence with the Internal Revenue Service

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  The applicant enlisted in the Regular Army on 1 November 2000 and appears to have held an infantry military occupational specialty. 

2.  It also appears subsequent to completion of training he was reassigned to Company B, 1st Battalion, 506th Infantry, 2nd Infantry Division, Korea. 

3.  On 11 June 2002, consistent with his pleas, he was convicted by a special court-martial of:

* one specification of failing to go at the time prescribed to his appointed place of duty
* one specification of failing to obey a lawful order
* one specification of stealing a credit card
* four specifications of credit card fraud
* one specification of larceny
* three specifications of falsely pretending to be the person authorized to use a stolen credit card

4.  The court sentenced him to confinement for 7 months and a bad conduct discharge.  He was confined at Fort Knox, KY, effective 1815 hours on 11 June 2002.

5.  On 17 October 2002, the convening authority approved a lesser sentence of confinement for 3 months and a bad conduct discharge, and except for the bad conduct discharge ordered the sentence executed.

6.  On 8 September 2003, the U.S. Army Court of Criminal Appeals affirmed the findings of guilty and the sentence. 

7.  There is no indication he petitioned the U.S. Army Court of Military Review for a grant of review with respect to any matter of law.

8.  Headquarters, U.S. Army Armor Center, Fort Knox, KY, Special Court-Martial Order Number 21, dated 30 January 2004, shows that after completion of all required post-trial and appellate reviews, the convening authority ordered the bad conduct discharge duly executed.

9.  On 26 March 2004, Headquarters, U.S. Army Armor Center, Fort Knox, KY, published Orders 086-0162 ordering his discharge from the Army.  Accordingly, he was discharged from the Army on 2 April 2004.  The DD Form 214 he was issued shows he was discharged under the provisions of Army Regulation     635-200 (Personnel Separations - Enlisted Personnel), chapter 3, as a result of court-martial, other.  This form further shows the applicant's character of service as bad conduct and that he completed 3 years, 2 months, and 23 days of creditable military service.  However, this form also shows he:

* had lost time from 11 June 2002 to 18 August 2002
* was on excess leave from 4 September 2002 to 2 April 2004

10.  Upon his discharge from the Army, DFAS audited his pay records between May 2002 and September 2007, although he was discharged in 2004.  DFAS established a debt against him in the amount of $9,346.72, consisting of his:

* total entitlements (basic pay, housing/quarters allowances, clothing allowance, and value of his accrued leave), less
* total deductions (allotments, federal and state taxes, social security/medicare, insurance, reduction to E-1, forfeiture of pay), less
* payments already received (mid-month and end of month pay, May to September 2002)

11.  It appears he contested/disputed this debt with DFAS.  Furthermore, it appears in connection with referring his case to a collection agency, DFAS officially notified him by letter that after a review of his account, they determined the principal amount of $9,346.72 remained a valid debt.  Interest and administrative fees were added, bringing the debt to a slightly higher dollar amount.   The debt was due to payments he had received after he entered into a no-pay status on 6 September 2002.  He was sentenced to confinement from 
11 June to 18 August 2002 and his reduction to E-1 was enforced on 25 June 2002.  

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant was convicted by a court-martial that sentenced him to confinement, reduction, and a bad-conduct discharge.  He was confined from 11 June 2002 to 18 August 2002.  Once he was released from confinement, he was placed on excess leave from 4 September 2002 to 2 April 2004.  Excess leave is not creditable for pay.  

2.  It also appears subsequent to his court-martial conviction he continued to receive monetary benefits through the date he was placed on excess leave, as shown on the DFAS-IN Form 0-641 he provided.  

3.  Upon discharge from the Army, DFAS officials computed his entitlements and subtracted his deductions and payments.  The net amount is what he owed.  DFAS officials advised him of the reason for this debt.  He disputed it but upon review, DFAS determined it remained a valid debt.  

4.  The applicant has not provided evidence to confirm this debt is in error or unjust.  As such, he is not entitled to the requested relief. 

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)                                         AR20120021583





3


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20120021583



2


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

Similar Decisions

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2013 | 20130005814

    Original file (20130005814.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Application for correction of military records (with supporting documents provided, if any). On 5 March 2013, DFAS provided the applicant with a letter which indicated they had reexamined his account and determined that the principal debt balance of $13,222.52 was correct. DFAS indicated that he was reduced to E-1 effective 16 September 2004, which is correct since it appears the general court-martial convening authority approved his sentence on 15 September 2004.

  • AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2011-03705

    Original file (BC-2011-03705.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    DFAS-IN states the applicant was discharged from the service due to a General Court-Martial Order, dated 18 July 2007. The complete JAJM evaluation is at Exhibit C. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATIONS: The DFAS letter has errors and incorrect information. Based on the evidence of record and in an attempt to guide the applicant to the proper office for resolution, we determined the applicant is correct in that,...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2005-01925

    Original file (BC-2005-01925.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    When he was on active duty from July 2002 through February 2004, he tried to resolve a portion of his debt. He believes the countless hours spent to resolve his pay record problems show that no one knows if his pay record is correct. He respectfully requests the Board waiver the remaining $3517.76 and have DFAS return the money he’s been paying them in the time he’s tried to resolve this case.

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140019461

    Original file (20140019461.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 19 November 2004, he consulted with legal counsel and voluntarily requested discharge in lieu of trial by court-martial under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations – Enlisted Personnel), chapter 10. Both letters state: * the debt has been determined to be valid * the amount due is for collection of payments received after entering a no-pay status, for collection of an advance payment, and for collection of a UCMJ forfeiture * $13,604.68 of the debt is due to...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2001-00580A

    Original file (BC-2001-00580A.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant’s complete review is at Exhibit K. _________________________________________________________________ ADDITIONAL HQ USAF/JAA EVALUATION: HQ USAF/JAA reiterates that the applicant’s original debt of $50,669.90 was reduced to $25,669.90 and, to the extent that his reconsideration request was for the repayment of this validly established debt owed to the US, it should be denied. DFAS summarizes the applicant’s indebtedness and adjustments thereto as follows: $50,669.90 Original...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090016367

    Original file (20090016367.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    The applicant was discharged on 7 April 1996 under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-40, paragraph 4-24b(3) by reason of physical disability with entitlement to severance pay. The applicant’s pay records at DFAS confirm he had a $15,579.82 debt at the time of his discharge. The applicant has not provided sufficient evidence which confirms he did not receive his disability severance pay.

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2012 | 20120022462

    Original file (20120022462.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Overall, several errors were committed in relation to her pay in December 1998 and then her retirement formula, computation of her retired pay, the length of time she was placed on the TDRL, and the more recent debt that occurred as a result of an audit of her pay records by DFAS. The applicant provides: * Self-authored breakdown of each LES * Listing of what appears to be her credit report * Divorce decree * Audit Request Form * Letter, dated 3 August 2009, from DFAS * Letter, dated 22...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2013 | 20130007583

    Original file (20130007583.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Army Regulation 210-26 (U.S. Military Academy) contemplates the Superintendent appointing an investigating officer to determine the validity of a debt that a person incurred while they were a cadet at USMA, even if that investigation is conducted after the individual has been separated from the USMA. Paragraph 7-9 (Breach of Service Agreement and Reimbursement of Educational Costs) of Army Regulation 210-26 states: a. a cadet who voluntarily, or because of misconduct, fails to complete the...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090005075

    Original file (20090005075.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    The applicant states, in effect, she has been told she owes the military a debt for 2 weeks of active duty pay; however, she does not believe she owes this debt. The applicant's record shows she enlisted in the ARNG for 8 years on 10 May 2006. The evidence shows that the applicant received pay and allowances for active duty service she did not perform after her unscheduled release from active duty on 9 November 2006 and that this overpayment resulted in the subject debt.

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2013 | 20130020581

    Original file (20130020581.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    His DD Form 214 shows an entitlement to separation pay; however, he didn't receive the money. They do not show an entitlement to/payment of separation pay. There is no evidence of record that shows the applicant received payment of separation pay at the time of his discharge.