Search Decisions

Decision Text

ARMY | BCMR | CY1980-1989 | 8706972
Original file (8706972.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied
APPLICANT REQUESTS: Reconsideration of his request for an upgrade of his undesirable discharge to general under honorable conditions.
APPLICANT STATES : In effect that the undesirable discharge was unfair because it was based on one isolated incident and with only a fifth grade education he did not understand what an undesirable discharge meant. That he was wounded in Vietnam, received the Purple Heart and an honorable discharge for his first enlistment.

 NEW EVIDENCE OR INFORMATION : Incorporated herein by reference are military records which were summarized in a memorandum of consideration (MOC) prepared to reflect the Board's original consideration of his case on 14 December 1988 (COPY ATTACHED).

The applicant, in effect, cites as a basis to upgrade his discharge, that he served favorably during his first tour, that he only had a fifth grade education and that the undesirable discharge was based on one isolated incident.

In support of his request the applicant submits a letter from his wife who states he needs an upgrade of his discharge to receive Veteran’s benefits..

The previous Board’s MOC describes from the applicant’s records the isolated incident as 819 days AWOL for which he requested discharge in lieu of trial by court-martial.

Army Regulation 15-185, paragraph 10c provides, in pertinent part, that reconsideration of a Board decision will be made when additional evidence or other matter including, but not limited to factual allegations or arguments, that were not previously available to the Board has been submitted.

 DISCUSSION : Considering all the evidence, allegations, and information presented by the applicant, together with the evidence of record, applicable law and regulations, it is concluded:

1. The applicant submits no evidence that the reason for the undesirable discharge was unfair for his 816 days AWOL.

2. The applicant’s 5 th grade education is noted, but in light of the fact the applicant demonstrated the capacity to complete basic training, an extremely stressful experience, serve in Vietnam without an offense, and receive an honorable discharge his request for his discharge to be upgraded is not warranted.

3 The discharge proceedings were conducted in accordance with law and regulations applicable at the time. The character of the discharge is commensurate with the applicant’s overall record of military service.

4. Prior to reaching the determination that it was not in the interest of justice to excuse the failure to timely file, the Board looked at the entire file. It was only after all other aspects had been considered and it had been concluded that there was no basis to recommend a correction of the records that the Board considered the statute of limitations. Had the Board determined that an error or injustice existed it undoubtedly would have recommended relief in spite of the failure to submit the application within the 3 year time limit. The Board has never denied an application simply because it was not submitted within the required time.

5. The overall merits of the case, including the latest submissions and arguments are insufficient as a basis for the Board to reverse its previous decision.

6. In view of the foregoing, there is no basis for granting the applicant’s request.

DETERMINATION : The applicant has failed to submit sufficient relevant evidence to demonstrate the existence of probable error or injustice.

 BOARD VOTE :
________ ________ ________ GRANT

________ ________ ________ GRANT FORMAL HEARING

________ ________ ________ DENY APPLICATION




                                                      Loren G. Harrell
                                                       Director

Similar Decisions

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY1980-1989 | 8604097

    Original file (8604097.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    APPLICANT REQUESTS : Reconsideration of his previous request to correct his records by upgrading his undesirable discharge. APPLICANT STATES : In effect, that since the last denial by the Board to upgrade his discharge his post service has changed and demonstrates he has been a good citizen and that his discharge should be upgraded. In support of his post service argument he submits the following:

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY1990-1993 | 9107175

    Original file (9107175.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    NEW EVIDENCE OR INFORMATION : Incorporated herein by reference are military records which were summarized in a memorandum of consideration (MOC) prepared to reflect the Board's original consideration of his case on 12 August 1992 (COPY ATTACHED).The contention that he was impaired due to alcoholism when he returned from Vietnam and that he was not himself constitutes new argument. There is no evidence of record that the applicant was impaired by alcohol and that he could not both tell right...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY1990-1993 | 9306188

    Original file (9306188.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Army Regulation 15-185, paragraph 10c provides, in pertinent part, that reconsideration of a Board decision will be made when additional evidence or other matter including, but not limited to factual allegations or arguments, that were not previously available to the Board has been submitted. The Board notes the applicant’s receipt of his GED and his intentions to rehabilitate to include being alcohol free, however, these unsubtantiated contentions do not demonstrate an error of an...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY1990-1993 | 9307651

    Original file (9307651.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Army Regulation 15-185, paragraph 10c provides, in pertinent part, that reconsideration of a Board decision will be made when additional evidence or other matter including, but not limited to factual allegations or arguments, that were not previously available to the Board has been submitted. Considering the entirety of the case, the Board has considered all of the applicant’s past and present contentions regarding his desire to have his discharge upgraded, but the applicant’s contentions...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY1980-1989 | 8110592B

    Original file (8110592B.rtf) Auto-classification: Approved

    The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein. The applicant stated at that time that he had no trouble in the Army until he returned from Korea and that some of his AWOL time had been associated with his inability to deal with the death of his father and with the suicide of his first wife. His drinking, of course, led to AWOLs.

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002075746C070403

    Original file (2002075746C070403.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    In accordance with Army Regulation 15-185, the application and the available military records pertinent to the corrective action requested were reviewed to determine whether to authorize a formal hearing, recommend that the records be corrected without a formal hearing, or to deny the application without a formal hearing if it is determined that insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate the existence of probable material error or injustice. The applicant requests...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY1980-1989 | 8300142

    Original file (8300142.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    APPLICANT REQUESTS : Reconsideration of his previous request to correct his records by upgrading his discharge. The applicant’s military records show that on 22 January 1981, after the approval of his request for a chapter 10 discharge that he was counseled on the requirements for completion of a medical examination prior to his separation. Considering the entirety of the case, the Board has considered all of the applicant’s past and present contentions regarding his desire to have his...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080018405

    Original file (20080018405.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Also incorporated herein are the military records which were summarized in the original consideration of his request to upgrade his discharge by the ABCMR in Docket Number AC93-11075, on 26 April 1995, wherein the Board carefully considered the applicant's entire service record as well as the evidence he submitted. With regard to his new issues, the Board determined that the applicant's records should be corrected to show his overseas service in Germany, but not to change the reason for his...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2012 | 20120016069

    Original file (20120016069.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant also states the FSM's discharge should be upgraded to honorable for the following reasons: * clemency is warranted because it is an injustice for him to suffer the adverse consequences of a bad discharge * under current standards, he would not have received the type of discharge he did * his average conduct and efficiency ratings/behavior/and proficiency marks were good * he received personal awards, decorations, and letters of recommendation * he had combat service * his...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2012 | 20120010183

    Original file (20120010183.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    BOARD DATE: 4 January 2013 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20120010183 THE BOARD CONSIDERED THE FOLLOWING EVIDENCE: 1. Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations) sets forth the basic policy for the separation of enlisted personnel. The applicant was not diagnosed with PTSD during his military service.