APPLICANT REQUESTS: That the last name on his Certificate of Military Service (NA Form 13038) be corrected. He also requests that the medals he is authorized for his Vietnam service be issued to him and that his undesirable discharge be upgraded.
APPLICANT STATES: In effect, that the foregoing changes are necessary to ensure his record is accurate.
EVIDENCE OF RECORD: The applicant's military records show:
He initially enlisted in the Regular Army on 11 August 1969 and after completing just over 1 year of service he was honorably discharged and immediately reenlisted for 3 additional years on 19 September 1970. He was discharged at his own request for the good of the service on 13 September 1971 and issued an Undesirable Discharge Certificate.
His record reflects that he is authorized the National Defense Service Medal, the Vietnam Service Medal and the Vietnam Campaign Medal. (The aforementioned awards were authorized for issue to the applicant by the US Army Reserve Personnel Center (ARPERCEN) via DA Form 1577, Authorization for Issuance of Awards. A copy of the authorization was provided to him and another copy is included in his records.)
The applicants records show that the name and social security number under which he enlisted appears the same throughout his record. The incorrect last name on the Certificate of Service he was furnished appears to be a clerical error.
He arrived in Vietnam on 14 November 1970. On 20 March 1971 he was convicted of possession of a trace of heroin by a special court-martial. On 14 May 1971 he accepted nonjudicial punishment under the provisions of Article 15, UCMJ for failure to obey a lawful order and on 19 August 1971 charges were preferred against him for unauthorized possession of a liberty pass and possession of heroin. Before these charges could be disposed of three additional charges were added for being in an off-limits area and two specifications of stealing.
On 27 August 1971 he requested discharge for the good of the service in lieu of trial by court-martial under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200. After consultation with military counsel, his request was approved by the appropriate commander who directed that he be discharged under other than honorable conditions and issued an Undesirable Discharge Certificate. He was returned to the States and discharged effective 13 September 1971.
On 6 January 1981 the Army Discharge Review Board denied the applicants request for upgrade of his discharge.
Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel. Chapter 10 of the regulation provides, in pertinent part, that a member who has committed an offense for which the authorized punishment includes a punitive discharge may submit a request for discharge for the good of the service in lieu of trial by court-martial. The request may be submitted at ant time after charges have been preferred and must include the individuals admission of guilt. Although an honorable or general discharge is authorized, a discharge under other than honorable conditions is normally considered appropriate.
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. It appears that the last name on the Certificate of Military Service, NA Form 13038, is incorrect and should be corrected as he requests.
2. The ARPERCEN has provided the applicant with an authorization for the issuance of the Vietnam awards to which he is entitled.
3. The applicants discharge proceedings were conducted in accordance with law and regulations applicable at the time. The character of his discharge is commensurate with his record of military service. Considering his numerous acts of indiscipline, it does not appear that an undesirable discharge was too severe.
4. In view of the foregoing, there appears to be 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.
NOTE: The Commander, ARPERCEN will be requested to correct the applicants Certificate of Military Service, NA Form 13038, to reflect his correct last name as shown on his application for correction of military records and in his military records..
BOARD VOTE:
GRANT
GRANT FORMAL HEARING
DENY APPLICATION
Karl F. Schneider
Acting Director
ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | 20110002485
The record contains a request for discharge for the good of the service in lieu of trial by court-martial in accordance with chapter 10, Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations) with the applicant's name; however, the request is not signed. An Undesirable Discharge Certificate would normally be furnished an individual who was discharged for the good of the Service at the time the applicant was discharged. ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20110002485 3 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | 20110022752
The applicant states he was incarcerated in Vietnam and was seen by counsel who advised him to request a chapter 10 discharge. On 15 January 1975, the Army Discharge Review Board denied his request for an upgrade of his discharge and determined his discharge was both proper and equitable. At the time, he understood Soldiers who sought help for their drug problems would receive amnesty and was surprised to learn the applicant received a less than honorable discharge.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | 20110019545
Application for correction of military records (with supporting documents provided, if any). His record includes a letter from the NPRC Records Reconstruction Branch, dated 15 January 1991, informing him he had been erroneously issued an NA Form 13038 showing his service was terminated by "general discharge under honorable conditions." The applicant is advised to destroy the erroneous NA Form 13038 in his possession showing he was separated by "General Discharge Under Honorable Conditions."
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002074299C070403
The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein. The Board considered the following evidence: APPLICANT REQUESTS: That his undesirable discharge be upgraded to an honorable 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 | CY2002 | 2002080373C070215
EVIDENCE OF RECORD : The applicant's military records show: On 13 January 1982, the Army Discharge Review Board determined that the applicant’s discharge had been proper and equitable, and it voted to deny the applicant’s request for an upgrade to his discharge. 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:
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 | 2002079620C070215
The Army Discharge Review Board denied the applicant’s petition to upgrade his discharge. That board also presumed regularity in the processing of the applicant’s discharge because documents associated with his discharge were not in records available to that board. The applicant has presented no evidence that his separation was processed improperly.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002083030C070215
EVIDENCE OF RECORD : The applicant's military records show: The Army Discharge Review Board reviewed his case and on 9 April 1979 denied relief. This program, known as the DOD Discharge Review Program (Special) (SDRP) required, in the absence of compelling reasons to the contrary, that a discharge upgrade to either honorable or general be issued in the case of any individual who had either completed a normal tour of duty in Southeast Asia, been wounded in action, been awarded a military...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | 20110002238
BOARD DATE: 6 September 2011 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20110002238 THE BOARD CONSIDERED THE FOLLOWING EVIDENCE: 1. The applicant requests upgrade of his undesirable discharge to a general discharge. Since the applicant's drug abuse and reaction to combat stressors were known at the time of his discharge, it must be presumed that these were taken into consideration when the applicant's request for discharge was approved.