Search Decisions

Decision Text

ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140015993
Original file (20140015993.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

		IN THE CASE OF:  	  

		BOARD DATE:  21 April 2015  	  

		DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20140015993 


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 reconsideration of his earlier request for correction of his military records to show he completed 20 years of qualifying service in the New Jersey Army National Guard (NJARNG) for a non-regular retirement.
   
2.  The applicant states that he feels things were overlooked in the original Board's consideration.  He makes the following comments/arguments:

	a.  He states that there was a question concerning sanctuary or vesting that was not addressed by the Board.  He contends that there was information concerning this while he was serving in the NJARNG.

	b.  He does not understand how it is his fault that the government does not have his military records.  His question is, "where are they?"

	c.  With regard to probable error or injustice, he states, in effect, that when the captain in question said he was putting in papers to retire the applicant and told him to sign the papers, he said he refused to sign them.  He told the captain that he did not want out of the NJARNG.  The captain's answer was that he did not care what the applicant wanted.  The applicant contends he was never officially notified of his release from the unit.  No paperwork was ever sent to him stating he was being released.  To this day, he does not have any release or discharge document.

	d.  He states when his Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) representative was reviewing the applicant's paperwork, the Ribbon of Honor and a Merit Award was found.  The applicant states he never knew about these two awards.  He also contends that he was never given credit for attending summer camp in 1976.  The paperwork shows he was let go in March which is incorrect because he was not let go until Monday of the second week of summer camp.  He was also informed that he was to be carried on the unit roster until the end of his contract which would have given him more than 20 years of service.

	e.  The applicant states he wants what he and his VA representative believes he deserves.  The applicant states that when all of this was taking place, the company clerk told him he had no idea why this was being done to him.  The clerk said the applicant only needed this last contract to complete his 20 years.

3.  The applicant provides no additional documentation.

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  Incorporated herein by reference are military records which were summarized in the previous consideration of the applicant's case by the Army Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR) in Docket Number AR20130012192, on 11 March 2014.

2.  The applicant has raised questions concerning actions of the original Board which are considered new evidence requiring consideration by the Board.

3.  The original Record of Proceedings (ROP) show:

	a.  All of the applicant's military records were not available for review, in particular his National Guard Bureau (NGB) Form 23B (ARNG Retirement Points History Statement) and his Army Reserve Personnel Center (ARPC) Form 249-E (Chronological Statement of Retirement Points).

	b.  The applicant submitted evidence showing the NJARNG determined he had completed 18 years and 11 months of service which was short of the required 20 years of qualifying service for retirement.

	c.  The available evidence was insufficient to make any determination concerning a possible error or injustice in the applicant's case.  The Board advised him to contact the Commander, U.S. Human Resources Command (HRC) at Fort Knox, Kentucky.  It was believed that HRC may have additional information and be able to provide an updated ARPC 249-E showing additional service.

	d.  Accordingly, the Board denied the applicant's request due to insufficient documentary evidence to make a determination.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant contends that his military records should be corrected to show he completed 20 years of qualifying service in the NJARNG for a non-regular retirement.
   
2.  The applicant's comments and arguments have been carefully considered.  Unfortunately, he has not provided any documentation to substantiate any claim of error or injustice.  

3.  The applicant raises an issue about sanctuary or vesting, but fails to provide any clarifying comments concerning how this applies to his situation.  Neither issue was mentioned by the applicant or the Board in the original ROP.

4.  The comments in the original ROP concerning the non-availability of his military records were not meant to direct any blame toward him or anyone else.  It is simply a fact that the records were not and still are not available for review.  At the time he served, records were not automated.  Rather, they were hard copy paper documents filed in a folder.

5.  The applicant's comments about certain events that occurred and when he was released from his unit are noted.  Unfortunately, he has not provided any corroborating evidence upon which the Board could possibly base any decision regarding error or injustice.

6.  In view of the above, 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 to amend the decision of the ABCMR set forth in Docket Number AR20130012192, dated 11 March 2014.





      _______ _   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)                                         AR20140015993



3


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20140015993



2


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

Similar Decisions

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2013 | 20130012192

    Original file (20130012192.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant's complete military records are not available to the Board for review. c. NGB Form 22 that shows he enlisted in the NJARNG on 27 August 1968 and was separated on 5 March 1976. f. Letter from the NJARNG to a Member of Congress, dated 20 March 2013, advising him that based on the documents the applicant submitted, the NJARNG determined he completed 18 years and 11 months of military service.

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2013 | 20130019054

    Original file (20130019054.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant states he was promised by the U.S. Army Command and General Staff College (CGSC) Adjunct Faculty that his retirement orders would be adjusted in order to continue grading papers for the old CGSC course and earn additional retirements points beyond his MRD as the new CSGC course was being phased in. He was not attached to CGSC per Army Regulation 140-10, paragraph 3-7 to complete IDT duty of grading papers. He completed 28 years of commissioned service.

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2012 | 20120021824

    Original file (20120021824.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    His records contain a Chronological Record of Military Service, dated 18 October 1989, wherein it shows, he had 13 years, 10 months, and 5 days of qualifying service for retirement as of 2 November 1989 and a total of 2,396 retirement points. The applicant provides, and his records contain, a Chronological Statement of Retirement Points, dated 13 July 2011, wherein it shows he had 19 years, 6 months, and 18 days of qualifying service for retirement as of 20 July 1991 and a total of 2,676...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2012 | 20120022093

    Original file (20120022093.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant requests, in effect, correction of his record to show he was retained in service under Title 10, U.S. Code, section 1176(b) (10 USC 1176(b)) and allowed to complete 20 years of Reserve service qualifying for retired pay. The applicant provides: * self-authored statement * Enlisted Qualitative Retention Board letter * Order 43-07 * DD Form 256A (Honorable Discharge) * Department of the Army Reserve Personnel (DARP) Form 249-3 (Chronological Record of Military Service) * Point...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2010 | BC-2010-00273

    Original file (BC-2010-00273.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The erroneous DD Form 214, documenting a released from active duty date of 30 Sep 07, credits the applicant with more than the requisite 18 years of total active service and would provide a basis for his claims. ARPC records support the conclusion the DD Form 214 was in error and the re-issued form reflects the applicantÂ’s accrued time as 16 years, 4 months, and 6 days of active service. The applicant contends he had attained more than 18 years of total active service, thus qualifying him...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2013 | 20130012388

    Original file (20130012388.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    The applicant provides: * DA Form 1574 (Report of Proceedings by Investigating Officer/Board of Officers), dated 13 December 1992, and related documents * DA Form 4697 (Department of the Army Report of Survey), dated 6 January 1993, and related documents * DA Form 4651-R (Request for Reserve Component Assignment or Attachment), dated 24 January 1993 * an undated memorandum to the applicant, subject: Reduction Under Army Regulation 140-158 (Enlisted Personnel Classification, Promotion, and...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100010082

    Original file (20100010082.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 23 September 2010 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20100010082 THE BOARD CONSIDERED THE FOLLOWING EVIDENCE: 1. The applicant argues the following paragraphs in the CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE section of the original ROP: a. paragraph 2: The applicant questions how he could have received a fair and impartial review if all of his military records were not available. However, none of the evidence clearly shows that the decisions of the MEB and PEB were wrong at the time.

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2013 | 20130020511

    Original file (20130020511.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    He affiliated with a U.S. Army Reserve (USAR) unit, and his ARPC Form 249-E shows he earned 60 points and a qualifying year for RYE 15 June 1983. Clearly, it should not have been the first record month. As a result, the Board recommends that all Department of the Army records of the individual concerned be corrected by: a. redistributing retirement points to show a qualifying year for RYEs ending 15 June 1984 and 15 June 1985; b. showing he was eligible for retired pay and placing him on...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2006 | 20060003984C070205

    Original file (20060003984C070205.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant requests reconsideration of adjustment to his date of rank for captain from 1 October 1999 to 13 April 1998, based on a change to the Army Reserve time in grade promotion policy. National Guard Regulation 600-100, chapter 8, states that the promotion authority for all ARNG officers is the State Adjutant General. In view of the circumstances in this case, the applicant is not entitled to adjustment to his promotion effective date and date of rank for captain from 1 October...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2012 | 20120018714

    Original file (20120018714.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The board recommended referral to a Physical Evaluation Board (PEB). On 20 April 2011, he was issued a Notification of Eligibility for Retired Pay at Age 60 with 15 Years of Service. The evidence of record shows he underwent an MEB, which recommended referral to a PEB.