IN THE CASE OF:
BOARD DATE: 23 June 2015
DOCKET NUMBER: AR20150007316
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 discharge date.
2. The applicant states, on his DD Form 149 (Application for Correction of Military Record) in item 4 (Date of Discharge or Release from Active Duty), "2004/04/14." He states the error that is causing a debt to the Government was not created by any error on his part. He writes that he discovered this error on 24 June 2014 and that the debt was caused by unit error and not his actions. He has been out of the Army since 2005.
3. The applicant provides a copy of his 12 December 2005 DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty).
CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:
1. Title 10, U.S. Code, section 1552(b), provides that applications for correction of military records must be filed within 3Â 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 served on active duty as a transportation officer from 18 May 1997 until he was dismissed as a captain on 12 December 2005.
3. He pled guilty to several offenses before a general court-martial and was sentenced to dismissal. The convening authority approved the findings and sentence.
4. On 10 December 2004, the U.S. Army Court of Criminal Appeals affirmed the findings of guilty and the sentence. On 28 October 2005, the Assistant Secretary of the Army (Financial Management and Comptroller) ordered the dismissal to be executed. The applicant was dismissed on 12 December 2005.
DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:
There is no available evidence that the applicant was discharged on any date other than 12 December 2005.
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) AR20150007316
3
ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
1
ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20150007316
2
ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
1
ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | 20110006152
A debt collection form shows the applicant owes $28,882.32 for full military pay and entitlements he collected while in the following duty statuses: * AWOL * Desertion * Military confinement * Ordinary (Excess) leave 16. This regulation also provides guidance for Soldiers who have been released from an active status to include the ARNG/ARNG of the United States and U.S. Army Reserve who have incurred a debt to the U.S. Army. As a result, the Board recommends denial of so much of the...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080013505
THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE: 1. The applicant was discharged on 20 February 2007, his security clearance was revoked almost 2 years prior to his discharge. While it is regrettable that the revocation of the applicant's security clearance has caused him financial hardship, this does not form the basis of correcting the applicant's records to show that his security clearance was never revoked.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2013 | 20130007583
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 | DRB | CY2005 | 20050009265
Naomi Henderson | |Member | The Board considered the following evidence: Exhibit A - Application for correction of military records. The applicant stated, in a 12 October 2004 memorandum to the U. S. Army Cadet Command, that his disenrollment due to undesirable character as demonstrated by two driving under the influence (DUI) offenses and carrying a concealed weapon was erroneous and unsupported by factual evidence. The regulation does not require a civil conviction before a cadet may be...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090003766
Specifically, in the applicantÂ’s case, there are three distinct forms of relief the Army Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR) may provide: a. suspend or remit any portion of the sentence; b. remit the applicant's discharge by dating the remission any time prior to the Assistant's Secretary's execution of the dismissal; or c. substitute an administrative form of discharge with a dismissal of the sentence of court-martial. Charge I, Article 107 of the Uniform Code of Military...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140010812
On 1 July 2014, HRC issued the applicant a DD Form 215 (Correction to DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge From Active Duty) amending item 12b to show his separation date as 28 January 2009. While he shows he made attempts to get his DD Form 214, he was dismissed as a result of a general court-martial conviction and his DD Form 214 could not be issued until the appellate process was completed. He was dismissed from the USAR on 28 January 2009 and HRC issued a DD Form 215...
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2005-02932
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2005-02932 XXXXXXX COUNSEL: NONE XXXXXXX HEARING DESIRED: NO MANDATORY COMPLETION DATE: 26 MARCH 2007 _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His bad conduct discharge (BCD) be upgraded to a general (under honorable conditions) discharge. The Air Force Clemency and Parole Board considered and denied clemency for applicant on 13 July...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090006372
The applicant requests that his bad conduct discharge be changed to a medical discharge. He states he should have received treatment for his conditions instead of a bad conduct discharge. There is no evidence of record and the applicant has not submitted any evidence that he had a medical condition which would have warranted him being considered by a Medical Evaluation Board (MEBD).
ARMY | BCMR | CY2012 | 20120005406
The applicant's military personnel records do not contain any evidence that shows he was promoted to SSG (E-6) subsequent to 5 October 1978. Army Regulation 635-200, in effect at the time the applicant retired from active duty, provided the authority for the separation of Soldiers from the Active Army. Records show the applicant was promoted to SSG (E-6) on 10 December 1974 and that he received a DD Form 214 documenting his honorable service in that grade during the period from 30 March...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090014704
The applicant requests that his bad conduct discharge be upgraded to an under honorable conditions (general) discharge. At the time of his discharge he had completed 3 years, 10 months, and 28 days of net active service during the period of service under review. After a thorough and comprehensive review of the applicant's military service record, it is concluded that based on the seriousness of the offenses for which he was convicted, clemency is not appropriate.