APPLICANT REQUESTS: That his records be corrected to show that his discharge was based on a physical disability.
APPLICANT STATES: That he was sick during active duty and still is.
EVIDENCE OF RECORD: The applicant's military and medical records show:
On 21 September 1972, the applicant enlisted in the Regular Army. He completed his required training and was awarded military occupational specialty 94B (Cook).
During the period 7 March 1973-29 July 1974, the applicant accepted nonjudicial punishment under Article 15, Uniform Code of Military Justice on six occasions, for being absent from his place of duty, 6 times; absent without leave, 1 time; disobeying lawful orders, 3 times; and violation of a general regulation, 1 time.
During the period 20 November 1973-22 April 1974, the applicant, a command referral, attended an Alcohol and Drug Abuse Prevention and Control Program and was declared a failure.
On 24 January 1974, he was convicted by a summary court-martial of being absent from his place of duty on 26 and 27 December 1973. His sentence was a reduction, a forfeiture and restriction.
During the period 26 February-13 March 1974, he was issued a temporary physical profile for sore feet and the period 8 April-8 June 1974, for pseudofolliculitis barbae.
On 18 July 1974, his unit commander preferred court-martial charges against him for possession of heroin on 7 July; possession of marijuana on 12 July 1974; possession of amphetamines on 12 July 1974; attempted sale of heroin on 7 July 1974; escape from lawful custody; and, assaulting a military policeman and of his rights.
On 22 July 1974, after consulting with legal counsel, voluntarily requested a discharge for the good of the service in lieu of trial by court-martial under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 10. He acknowledged that he could receive a bad conduct or dishonorable discharge; that he was guilty of the charges against him; that he had consulted with legal counsel; and that he had no desire to perform further military service.
On 8 August 1974, a physical examination cleared the applicant for separation with a 111111A physical profile.
On 29 August 1974, the appropriate authority approved his request, directed his reduction to pay grade E-1 and that a undesirable discharge (UD) be issued.
On 13 November 1974, he was discharged, with a UD, in pay grade E-1, under the above cited regulation. His Report of Separation indicates that he had 2 years, 1 month and 2 days of creditable service and 19 days of lost time.
On 18 August 1979, the Army Discharge Review Board (ADRB) determined that the applicants discharge was proper but not equitable. The ADRB upgraded his discharge to general.
On 5 March 1997, the Office of the Surgeon General opined (COPY ATTACHED) that the applicant met medical retention standards at the time of his separation.
Army Regulation 635-200, then in effect, set forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel. Chapter 10 of that regulation provided, in pertinent part, that a member who had committed an offense or offenses for which the authorized punishment included a punitive discharge could submit a request for discharge for the good of the service in lieu of trial by court-martial. A GD was normally issued.
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. In order to justify correction of a military record, the applicant must show to the satisfaction of the Board, or it must otherwise satisfactorily appear, that the record is in error or unjust. The applicant has failed to submit evidence that would satisfy the aforementioned requirement.
2. The applicants separation was conducted in accordance with regulation in effect at the time.
3. The applicant voluntarily elected to be discharged in this manner and should not now be allowed to change his mind.
4. There is no evidence of record of any medical condition which would entitle the applicant to a physical disability discharge, since he met medical retention standards at the time of his separation.
5. In view of the foregoing, there is no basis for granting the applicants 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
Karl F. Schneider
Acting Director
ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080016653
THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE: 1. Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel. Chapter 10 of that regulation provides, in pertinent part, that a member who has committed an offense or offenses for which the authorized punishment includes a punitive discharge may at any time after the charges have been preferred, submit a request for discharge for the good of the service in lieu of trial by court-martial.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2005 | 20050018202C070206
The applicant requests that his discharge be upgraded. Chapter 10 of that regulation provides, in pertinent part, that a member who has committed an offense or offenses for which the authorized punishment includes a punitive discharge may at any time after the charges have been preferred, submit a request for discharge for the good of the service in lieu of trial by court-martial. As a result, the time for the applicant to file a request for correction of any error or injustice to this...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2003 | 2003083606C070212
APPLICANT REQUESTS: That his undesirable discharge (UD) be upgraded to an honorable discharge. EVIDENCE OF RECORD : The applicant's military records show: That, on 17 February 1972, he enlisted in the Regular Army for 3 years. An Army Discharge Review Board (ADRB) Case Report, dated 30 March 1982, shows the applicant consulted with legal counsel and, on 27 February 1975, requested separation under the provisions of chapter 10, AR 635-200, in lieu of trial by court-martial.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2012 | 20120000769
The applicant requests that his undesirable discharge be upgraded. On 23 September 1974 after consulting with defense counsel, the applicant submitted a request for discharge for the good of the service in lieu of trial by court-martial under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations General), chapter 10. An undesirable discharge was normally considered appropriate at the time of the applicant's discharge.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2003 | 2003085032C070212
The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein. APPLICANT REQUESTS: That his undesirable discharge be upgraded to a general discharge. The Army Discharge Review Board (ADRB) denied the applicant’s request for an upgrade of his discharge on 1 March 1973.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | 20110014305
The applicant requests his undesirable discharge be upgraded to an honorable discharge. He acknowledged he understood the elements of the offense he was charged with and he was: * guilty of the offense with which he was charged * making the request of his own free will * advised he may be furnished an Undesirable Discharge Certificate * advised he could submit statements in his own behalf 9. Although an honorable or general discharge was authorized, an Undesirable Discharge Certificate was...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100029840
THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE: 1. On 30 March 1982, the Army Discharge Review Board denied his request for an upgrade of his discharge. There is no evidence of record and he has provided no evidence to show he sustained injuries during his period of active duty 4.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002067886C070402
The applicant received three discharge reviews from the Army Discharge Review Board (ADRB). Chapter 10 of that regulation provided, in pertinent part, that a member who committed an offense or offenses for which the authorized punishment included a punitive discharge might submit a request for discharge for the good of the service in lieu of trial by court-martial. DISCUSSION : Considering all the evidence, allegations, and information presented by the applicant, together with the evidence...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2004 | 20040004121C070208
Lawrence Foster | |Member | The Board considered the following evidence: Exhibit A - Application for correction of military records. THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE: 1. At the time of the applicant's separation, a UD was appropriate.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2004 | 20040011635C070208
The applicant requests, in effect, that his undesirable discharge (UD) be upgraded to an honorable discharge, and/or that he receive a medical discharge. The applicant’s request for an upgrade of his discharge to either an honorable discharge or medical discharge was carefully considered. As a result, there is insufficient evidence showing the applicant suffered from a medical condition that warranted his processing for separation through medical channels at the time.