ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 14 August 2019 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20170001357 APPLICANT REQUESTS: reconsideration of his previous request for correction of his DD Form 214 (Report of Separation from Active Duty) ending on 24 June 1976 to show his active service starting on 5 January 1995 with 28 years of active service, including 23 years under cover. APPLICANT'S SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS CONSIDERED BY THE BOARD: * Reconsideration Letter * DD Form 149 (Application for Correction of Military Record) * Document titled “This is Army Air Defense Post” * Document titled “Final Chapter – Project Blue Book” FACTS: 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 AR20150013795, on 1 November 2016. 3. The applicant states he would like to inform the Board of the errors and the injustice of this letter. a. The dates of service 21 January 1971, he entered military service. b. Any superior force landing on our shore is in violation of the sovereignty of our nation and then constitutes an Act of War. Congress has no jurisdiction on this matter. c. An Army Air Defense Post cannot be denied or repudiated and also is used for lost and forgotten gaps in history books. This is the correct and true definition of an Army Air Defense Post. d. He states “Let the records show that the lack of security within the Army Review Boards” released classified information which should not have been disclosed in letter. e. The drawings he sent to the Army Review Board show and demonstrates that if we have a landing in the open only a fine by the Federal Aviation Administration for not having permission or authorization will ever be done. Only if hostilities do not take place. f. He was specially trained by the Army Air Defense at Fort Bliss, TX in or around May of 1973 to be undercover for the Army Air Defense in the case of this event. His training along with “other men chosen gives us the authority to do many things and I state: Arrest people for removing an Army Air Defense Post from where placed on a building and close down building to make sure this post is not removed.” g. No formal letter has been received by him stating resignation in 2016. He contends that he will remains on active duty and has been for a total of 27.5 years on 5 January 2017. h. He concludes that “We got off pretty damn lucky back in 1995 for this could have escalated into an attack on a non-hostile air craft. The radio broadcast by Orson Welles show, that the people’s responses to such an event would have freaked them out. People who are afraid do things they would normally never do if not scared.” 3. The applicant provides two documents titled “This is Army Air Defense Post” and “Final Chapter – Project Blue Book.” 4. Review of the applicant’s service records shows: a. The applicant was inducted into the Army of the United States on 10 February 1971. He held military occupational specialty (MOS) 11D (Armor Reconnaissance Scout). b. He served in Germany from 1 July 1971 to 12 February 1973. He was honorably discharged on 28 December 1972 for immediate reenlistment. His DD Form 214 (Armed Forces of the United States Report of Transfer or Discharge) for this period of service shows he completed 1 year, 10 months and 20 days of active service. c. He reenlisted in the Regular Army on 28 December 1972. He was reassigned on a permanent change of station to Fort Lewis, WA, arriving around 23 February 1973. d. He again served in Germany, arriving on or about 24 February 1976. On 23 March 1976, he was awarded MOS 16P (Air Defense Artillery Short Range Missile Crewman). Around the beginning of June 1976, he was attached to a unit at Fort Lewis. e. On 7 June 1976, he submitted a DA Form 2476 (Application for Separation – Hardship or Dependency). He indicated being separated from his family (wife and two children) caused him to suffer depression, and he had been seeking help from a psychiatrist. f. On 8 June 1976, the separation authority located at Fort Lewis approved the applicant's request and directed discharge under the provisions of Army Regulation (AR) 635-200 (Personnel Separations – Enlisted Personnel), chapter 6 (Separation Because of Dependency or Hardship), paragraph 6-4a (Dependency). g. The applicant was honorably discharged from active duty on 24 June 1976, in accordance with paragraph 6-4 of AR 635-200. His DD Form 214 (Report of Separation from Active Duty) for this period of service showed: * he completed 3 years, 5 months, and 27 days of net active creditable service for this period, and had 5 years, 4 months, and 15 days total active service * he was separated at Fort Lewis * he was assigned Reenlistment (RE) Code of RE-3 (ineligible for reenlistment unless a waiver is granted) h. His available service records are void of any orders indicating he was directed to return to active duty at any point after his discharge. Additionally, there is no documentation verifying he enlisted, was inducted, or otherwise added to the Army's rolls at any time after his discharge. 4. By regulation (AR 635-200), paragraph 6-3, states Soldiers may be discharged or released because of genuine dependency or hardship. A hardship exists when, in circumstances not involving death or disability of a member of a Soldier’s (or spouse’s) immediate family, separation from the Service will materially affect the care or support of the family by alleviating undue and genuine hardship. Under this provision for hardship discharge, parenthood of married service women and sole parenthood are the two conditions under which separation may be granted. 5. By regulation (AR 635-200), Chapter 12 (Retirement for Length of Service) outlines the requirements to be retired based on length of service. As stated in Title 10, U.S. Code, sections 3914 and 3917, Soldiers must be on active duty when they retire. A Soldier in the Regular Army who has completed 20, but less than 30 years of active Federal service in the U.S. Armed Forces may, at the discretion of the Secretary of the Army, be retired at his or her request. The Soldier must have completed all required service obligations at the time of retirement. BOARD DISCUSSION: After reviewing the application and all supporting documents, the Board found the relief was not warranted. The applicant’s contentions were carefully considered. The Board agreed his record is absent evidence to support his contentions, and the literature he provided is not a DoD authoritative source to obtain service data from; therefore, the Board concluded there was insufficient evidence to grant the requested relief. BOARD VOTE: Mbr 1 Mbr 2 Mbr 3 : : : 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 the overall merits of this case are insufficient as a basis to amend the decision of the ABCMR set forth in Docket Number AR20150013795, on 1 November 2016. 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. REFERENCE: Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations) provides the criteria for the separation of enlisted personnel. Paragraph 6-3, states Soldiers of the Active Army and the Reserve Components may be discharged or released because of genuine dependency or hardship. The regulation provides that hardship exists when, in circumstances not involving death or disability of a member of a Soldier’s (or spouses) immediate family, separation from the Service will materially affect the care or support of the family by alleviating undue and genuine hardship. Under this provision for hardship discharge, parenthood of married service women and sole parenthood are the two conditions under which separation may be granted. //NOTHING FOLLOWS// ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20170001357 4 1