Search Decisions

Decision Text

ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140020736
Original file (20140020736.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

		IN THE CASE OF:  	  

		BOARD DATE:  21 July 2015	  

		DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20140020736 


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, that he be restored to the pay grade of E-4 and that his DD Form 214 (Report of Separation from Active Duty) be corrected accordingly. 

2.  The applicant states that nonjudicial punishment (NJP) was imposed against him for being disrespectful towards a noncommissioned officer and he was reduced from the pay grade of E-4 to E-1.  After the NJP was imposed he continued to do his duty and his performance continued to improve and he does not believe that he should have been reduced in rank.  He also states that he has served his community well and worked honorably until his retirement. 

3.  The applicant provides copies of his divorce decree, birth certificate, nine third-party character statements, a short self-authored essay, and three five by six inch index cards.

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 applicant enlisted in the Regular Army on 12 September 1975 for a period of 3 years and training as a combat engineer.  He completed his one-station unit training as a combat engineer at Fort Leonard Wood, Missouri and was transferred to Fort Ord, California for his first and only assignment.  

3.  He was advanced to the pay grade of E-4 on 1 October 1977.

4.  On 20 August 1976, NJP was imposed against the applicant for striking another Soldier in the face with his fist.

5.  On 24 May 1978, NJP was imposed against the applicant for failure to go to his place of duty and for being disrespectful in language toward a superior noncommissioned officer.  His punishment consisted of a reduction to the pay grade of E-3 (suspended for 60 days), a forfeiture of $113.00 and extra duty for   7 days.

6. On 8 August 1978, NJP was imposed against the applicant for being disrespectful in deportment towards a superior noncommissioned officer by disrupting a landmine warfare class, being disrespectful in language toward a superior noncommissioned officer, being disrespectful in language toward a superior commissioned officer, and wrongfully communicating a threat to commit bodily harm to a superior noncommissioned officer.  His punishment consisted of a reduction to the pay grade of E-1, a forfeiture of $199.00 and extra duty for 25 days.  The applicant did not appeal the punishment. 

7.  On 11 September 1978, the applicant was honorably released from active duty (REFRAD) in the pay grade of E-1 due to the expiration of his term of service.  He had served 3 years of active service.

8.  Army Regulation 635-5 (Separation Documents) serves as the authority for the preparation of the DD Form 214.  It provides, in pertinent part, that the DD Form 214 will reflect information from official records that are in effect at the time of separation.  Subsequent changes that occur outside of the period covered by that form will not be entered on the DD Form 214 retroactively.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant’s contentions and supporting documents have been carefully considered and appear to lack merit.
2.  The evidence of record clearly shows that the applicant was reduced from the pay grade of E-4 to the pay grade of E-1 in accordance with the laws and regulation in effect at the time with no violations of any of the applicant’s rights and his punishment was appropriate given the circumstances.  

3.  Accordingly, the applicant was REFRAD 33 days after his reduction in grade and it was properly recorded on his DD Form 214.  Inasmuch as there appears to be no error or injustice in his case, there is no basis for granting his request to have his rank restored.

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)                                         AR20140020736





3


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20140020736



3


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

Similar Decisions

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2005 | 20050004681C070206

    Original file (20050004681C070206.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    Allen L. Raub | |Member | The Board considered the following evidence: Exhibit A - Application for correction of military records. He was honorably discharged on 29 July 1969 and reenlisted on 30 July 1969, for a period of 3 years and assignment to Vietnam. On 14 August 1970, nonjudicial punishment (NJP) was imposed against him for being disrespectful in language towards a superior noncommissioned officer.

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080007013

    Original file (20080007013.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    On 1 September 1977, while still in BCT, he was released from military control by reason of a voided enlistment due to fraudulent enlistment under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 14. However, there is no evidence in the available records to show that the applicant’s discharge was ever actually accomplished or that his discharge orders and DD Form 214 were ever published. As a result, the Board recommends that all Department of the Army records of the individual concerned...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2005 | 20050001211C070206

    Original file (20050001211C070206.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    Accordingly, he was discharged under other than honorable conditions on 25 January 1980, under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 10, in lieu of trial by court-martial. There is no evidence in the available records to show that he applied to the Army Discharge Review Board for an upgrade of his discharge within that board's 15-year statute of limitations. A condition of submitting such a request is that the individual concerned must admit guilt to the charges against them...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2005 | 20050001211C070206

    Original file (20050001211C070206.TXT) Auto-classification: Denied

    Accordingly, he was discharged under other than honorable conditions on 25 January 1980, under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 10, in lieu of trial by court-martial. There is no evidence in the available records to show that he applied to the Army Discharge Review Board for an upgrade of his discharge within that board's 15-year statute of limitations. A condition of submitting such a request is that the individual concerned must admit guilt to the charges against them...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002069989C070402

    Original file (2002069989C070402.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. A review of the records fails to show that the applicant completed any training other than the training that was necessary to be awarded a cannon crewman military occupational specialty.

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080014299

    Original file (20080014299.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    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. He further contends that he should be issued a DD Form 215 which shows that he served in the Persian Gulf War. There is no evidence in his military records, and the applicant provided no evidence which shows he qualified for any campaign...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090005700

    Original file (20090005700.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant requests, in effect, that his undesirable discharge be upgraded to a general, under honorable conditions discharge. His records do not specifically state the punishment imposed against him for being AWOL. However, the available records show that he was discharged on 1 June 1972 under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations – Enlisted Personnel), chapter 10, for the good of the service - in lieu of trial by court-martial.

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2006 | 20060013756

    Original file (20060013756.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    The applicant requests that his records be corrected to reflect his new legal name, that he be awarded the Good Conduct Medal (GCMDL), that his award of the National Defense Service Medal (NDSM) and that his 100% disability rating from the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) be included on his report of separation (DD Form 214). On 22 July 1970, while serving in the pay grade of E-3, he reenlisted for a period of 4 years and assignment to Korea. The applicant was awarded the NDSM and that...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090005643

    Original file (20090005643.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE: 1. The applicant had completed 2 years, 1 month, and 17 days of creditable service with 8 days time lost. The applicant states that he served faithfully as a Soldier during his time in the military except for the last few months.

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100028293

    Original file (20100028293.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Application for correction of military records (with supporting documents provided, if any). The applicant's DD Form 214, as corrected by a DD Form 215 (Correction to DD Form 214) dated 28 September 2000, shows he was REFRAD in the rank/grade of PV2/E-2, which was the highest rank/grade he attain while on active service. The applicant has failed to show through the evidence of record and the evidence submitted with his application that he ever served in the rank of CPT or that his rank was...