| Ms. | Joann H. Langston | Chairperson | |
| Mr. | Thomas N. Kuhn | Member | |
| Ms. | Shirley L. Powell | Member |
| Mr. | Loren G. Harrell | Director | |
| Mr. | Joseph A. Adriance | Analyst |
APPLICANT REQUESTS: In effect, that his undesirable discharge (UD) be upgraded to a general/under honorable conditions discharge (GD).
APPLICANT STATES: In effect, that he was young when he enlisted and all he wanted to do was save the world.
EVIDENCE OF RECORD: The applicant's military records show:
On 31 October 1970 the applicant entered the Regular Army for 2 years at the age of 17. He completed basic training at Fort Gordon, Georgia and was assigned to Fort Bliss, Texas for on the job training in military occupational specialty (MOS) 76 Y (Supply Specialist).
The applicant’s record documents that the highest rank he held on active duty was private/E-2 and documents no specific acts of valor, achievement, or service warranting special recognition. However, the record does indicate he failed to report to Fort Bliss and was reported AWOL on 6 April 1971. On 21 February 1973 the applicant was apprehended by civilian authorities in Hobart, Indiana and on 23 February 1973 he was returned to military control. On 26 February 1973 the applicant was returned to duty at the Personnel Control Facility, Fort Riley, Kansas where he was placed in pre-trial confinement on 28 Februay1973.
On 19 March 1973 the applicant’s unit commander initiated elimination action on the applicant, under the provisions of Section VII, paragraph 45b, AR 635-206. The commander cited as the specific reason for the action the applicant being AWOL between 6 April 1971 and 23 February 1973. On the same date, the applicant consulted counsel, and after being advised of the basis for the contemplated separation action, completed his election of rights. The applicant elected to waive his right to have his case considered by a board of officers; to waive his right to personal appearance before a board of officers; and elected not to make a statement in his own behalf.
On 29 March 1973 the appropriate authority approved the applicant’s discharge and directed he be issued a UD. Accordingly, on 5 April 1973 the applicant was discharged after completing 5 months and 29 days of active duty, and accruing 569 days of time lost due to AWOL and confinement.
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.
Army Regulation 635-206, then in effect, provided in pertinent part for the administrative separation or retention of enlisted personnel who had committed an act and or acts of misconduct (i/e AWOL, desertion, conviction by civil authorities, and fraudulent entry). A UD was 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. The Board noted the factors raised by the applicant in his letter to the Board. However, the evidence of record and the independent evidence submitted by the applicant does not support his contentions that he was young and just wanted to serve. The applicant met entrance qualification standards to include age; he successfully completed basic training and simply failed to report for his next assignment, and did not return to military control until apprehended by civilian authorities. The discharge proceedings were conducted in accordance with law and regulation applicable at the time. The reason for and the character of the discharge are commensurate with the applicant's overall record of military service.
2. 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.
3. 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
ARMY | BCMR | CY1997 | 9705836C070209
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: Exhibit A - Application for correction of military records Exhibit B - Military Personnel Records (including advisory opinion, if any) APPLICANT REQUESTS: In effect, that his undesirable discharge (UD) be upgraded to a general/under honorable conditions discharge (GD). The commander cited as the specific reason for the action...
ARMY | BCMR | CY1997 | 9711058
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. On 4 June 1973 the...
ARMY | BCMR | CY1997 | 9711158
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. On 9 May 1973 a board of...
ARMY | BCMR | CY1997 | 9707137
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 | CY1997 | 9709670
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 | CY1997 | 9710592
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. EVIDENCE OF RECORD : The...
ARMY | BCMR | CY1997 | 9707137C070209
MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 6 May 1998 DOCKET NUMBER: AC97-07137 I certify that hereinafter is recorded the record of consideration of the Army Board for Correction of Military Records in the case of the above-named individual. 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...
ARMY | BCMR | CY1997 | 9705279
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: Accordingly, on 28 January 1975 the applicant was discharged after completing 1 year, 8 months, and 8 days of active military service and accruing 204 days of time lost due to civil confinement.There is no evidence that the applicant applied to the Army Discharge Review Board for upgrade of his discharge. The evidence of record...
ARMY | BCMR | CY1997 | 9708317
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 | CY1997 | 9709670C070209
The Board considered the following evidence: Exhibit A - Application for correction of military records Exhibit B - Military Personnel Records (including advisory opinion, if any) APPLICANT REQUESTS: In effect, that his undesirable discharge (UD) be upgraded to an honorable discharge (HD). EVIDENCE OF RECORD: The applicant's military records show: On 7 May 1963 the applicant was inducted into the Army of the United States for 2 years at the age of 18. The conviction by civil authorities,...