APPLICANT REQUESTS: That his undesirable discharge be upgraded to honorable. He contends that he was wrongfully stationed at Fort Riley, Kansas on his return from Vietnam and that is why his problems started with the military.
PURPOSE: To determine whether the application was submitted within the time limit established by law, and if not, whether it is in the interest of justice to excuse the failure to timely file.
EVIDENCE OF RECORD: The applicant's military records show:
He enlisted in the Regular Army on 29 January 1971 for 3 years and was discharged at his own request on 24 August 1972 under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 10, for the good of the service in lieu of trial by court-martial.
He served 8 months and 2 days in Vietnam. His awards include the National Defense Service Medal, the Vietnam Service Medal, the Vietnam Campaign Medal and the Marksman Badge with rifle bar.
On 25 April 1972 his unit reported him AWOL and 30 days later dropped him from the rolls as a deserter. He was returned to military control on 18 July 1972.
On 24 July 1972 charges were preferred against him for 85 days AWOL in violation of Article 86, UCMJ. Thereafter, he consulted with counsel and submitted a request for discharge in lieu of trial by court-martial. The appropriate authority approved his request, and directed the issuance of an Undesirable Discharge Certificate.
Army Regulation 635-200, in effect at the time, 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. The request could be submitted at any time after charges were preferred and must have included the individuals admission of guilt. Although an honorable or general discharge was authorized, an undesirable discharge was normally considered appropriate.
There is no evidence that the applicant applied to the Army Discharge Review Board for upgrade of his discharge within its 15-year statute of limitations.
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. Failure to file within 3 years may be excused by a correction board if it finds it would be in the interest of justice to do so.
DISCUSSION: The alleged error or injustice was, or with reasonable diligence should have been discovered on 24 August 1972, the date of discharge. The time for the applicant to file a request for correction of any error or injustice expired on 24 August 1975.
The application is dated 26 November 1995 and the applicant has not explained or otherwise satisfactorily demonstrated by competent evidence that it would be in the interest of justice to excuse the failure to apply within the time allotted.
DETERMINATION: The subject application was not submitted within the time required. The applicant has not presented and the records do not contain sufficient justification to conclude that it would be in the interest of justice to grant the relief requested or to excuse the failure to file within the time prescribed by law.
BOARD VOTE:
EXCUSE FAILURE TO TIMELY FILE
GRANT FORMAL HEARING
CONCUR WITH DETERMINATION
Karl F. Schneider
Acting Director
ARMY | BCMR | CY2013 | 20130000404
He served in Vietnam from 21 November 1971 to on or about 24 June 1972. On 13 August 1973, consistent with the chain of command recommendations, the separation authority approved the applicant's voluntary request for discharge under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 10, in lieu of trial by court-martial and directed his reduction to the lowest enlisted grade, if applicable, and issuance of an Undesirable Discharge Certificate. He was discharged accordingly on 21 August 1973.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140007030
Application for correction of military records (with supporting documents provided, if any). He stated that considering the applicant's Vietnam service and the absence of any civilian offenses, he requested the applicant receives the appropriate discharge. Despite a court-martial conviction and two instances of Article 15 for being AWOL, the applicant went AWOL a third time.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090014572
On 12 June 1972, the separation authority approved the applicant's request for discharge and directed that he be furnished an undesirable discharge. Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 3-7b, provides that a general discharge is a separation from the Army under honorable conditions. The medical evidence of record, dated 24 May 1972, states that a complete review of physical and mental examinations failed to reveal any defects which would have contributed to the misconduct of the applicant.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100019595
The immediate commander cited the applicant's extensive history of AWOL. On 6 June 1974, the separation authority approved the applicant's request for discharge under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 10, for the good of the service - in lieu of trial by court-martial. The DD Form 214 he was issued shows he was discharged for the good of the service in lieu of trial by court-martial with a characterization of service of under other than honorable conditions.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2006 | 20060004037C070205
The applicant also states that his undesirable discharge should be upgraded to honorable for the following reasons: (1) clemency is warranted because it is an injustice for him to continue to suffer the adverse consequences of a bad discharge; (2) under current standards, he would not receive the type of discharge he did; (3) his average conduct and efficiency ratings/behavior and proficiency marks were good; (4) he received awards, decorations, and letters of commendation; (5) he had combat...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2012 | 20120011523
On 10 January 1973, after consulting with 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 Enlisted Personnel), chapter 10. It is acknowledged he used heroin while serving in Vietnam but evidence shows he voluntarily requested discharge and he was discharged for the good of the service in lieu of trial by court-martial. _______ _X _______...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140016115
The military judge gave him a choice between a general discharge and return to service for 6 years to make up the 20 months of AWOL plus a reenlistment time that included 2 years in Vietnam. He served in Vietnam from on or about 20 October 1966 to on or about 22 September 1967. The DD Form 214 he was issued shows he was discharged under the provisions of chapter 10 of Army Regulation 635-200 in lieu of trial by a court-martial with an under other than honorable conditions discharge.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2006 | 20060004327C070205
The applicant requests that his undesirable discharge be upgraded to a general discharge. He also states that his discharge should have been upgraded 6 months after he was discharged. The U.S. Court of Appeals, observing that applicants to the Army Discharge Review Board (ADRB) are by statute allowed 15 years to apply there, and that this Board's exhaustion requirement (Army Regulation 15-185, paragraph 2-8), effectively shortens that filing period, has determined that the 3 year limit on...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080017968
The applicant requests, in effect, that his undesirable discharge be upgraded to a general, under honorable conditions discharge. Accordingly, the applicant was discharged with an undesirable discharge on 21 September 1972 under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 10, for the good of the service. However, his record of service included one nonjudicial punishment and 67 days of lost time.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100026162
The applicant requests his general discharge by upgraded to an honorable discharge. Following consultation with legal counsel, he requested discharge for the good of the service in lieu of trial by court-martial in accordance with chapter 10 of Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations). In his request for discharge, he acknowledged he understood that if the discharge request was approved, he may be discharged under other than honorable conditions and furnished an Undesirable...