MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION
IN THE CASE OF:
BOARD DATE: 25 November 1998
DOCKET NUMBER: AC97-10175
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.
The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein.
The Board, established pursuant to authority contained in 10 U.S.C. 1552, convened at the call of the Chairperson on the above date. 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 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 be upgraded to honorable.
APPLICANT STATES: That he was a platoon leader in basic training and that he received awards of the National Defense Service Medal and the Marksman Rifle Badge for his efforts. He goes on to state that he enjoyed the Army while in basic training but that his youth and immaturity impaired his ability to serve. He also goes on to state that he enlisted after only two years of high school and in retrospect wishes that he had waited until he was older, because he wanted to serve and tried to, but just could not. He continues by stating that he has been a good citizen since his discharge and he has worked for the government at the VA Medical Center. He has also been married for 25 years and has four children, two which have graduated from college and two who are in high school.
EVIDENCE OF RECORD: The applicant's military records show:
The applicant enlisted with parental consent on 11 December 1970 for a period of 2 years. He successfully completed his basic training at Fort Lewis, Washington and was transferred to Fort Ord, California for his advanced individual training (AIT).
On 27 April 1971, while in AIT, the applicant overdosed on Valium and was admitted to the hospital. The applicant admitted that he knowingly overdosed on the drug because he was feeling depressed and wanted to go home. A line of duty investigation was conducted that found the drug overdose was not in line of duty due to his own misconduct. The applicant was recycled to another AIT.
On 12 May 1971, while still in AIT, the applicant was convicted by a summary court-martial of failure to obey a lawful command from a superior NCO and failure to go to his place of duty. He was sentenced to a forfeiture of pay and 14 days restriction.
The facts and circumstances pertaining to the applicants administrative discharge are not present in the available records. However, his records do show that he was discharged under other than honorable conditions on 13 July 1971 under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-212 for unfitness - involvement in frequent incidents of a discreditable nature with civil or military authorities. He had served 7 months and 3 days of total active service and was still in a trainee status.
Army Regulation 635-212, in effect at the time, set forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel. It provided, in pertinent part, that members involved in frequent incidents of a discreditable nature with civil or military authorities were subject to separation for unfitness. An undesirable discharge was normally considered appropriate.
The applicant applied to the Army Discharge Review Board for an upgrade of his discharge. However, because he failed to apply to that board within its 15-year statute of limitations, the Board accepted his application in lieu of a DD Form 149.
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 the absence of evidence to the contrary, it must be presumed that the applicants administrative separation was accomplished in accordance with applicable regulations with no procedural errors that would tend to jeopardize his rights.
2. Accordingly, it must also be presumed that the type of discharge and the reasons were therefore were appropriate considering the facts of the case.
3. The applicant has failed to convince the Board through the evidence submitted or the evidence of record that his discharge was unjust and should be upgraded.
4. Careful consideration has been given to the applicants contentions. However, his record of undistinguished service and disciplinary record, does not warrant further relief.
5. 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
__jev____ ___rvo __ __js ____ DENY APPLICATION
Loren G. Harrell
Director
ARMY | BCMR | CY1997 | 9710175
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. The Board considered the following evidence: The applicant applied to the Army Discharge Review Board for an upgrade of his discharge.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2003 | 2003091657C070212
EVIDENCE OF RECORD : The applicant's military records show: On 7 October 1969, the appeal was denied and the punishment was ordered executed as presented. The request for the applicant's discharge submitted by command is not in the applicant's service personnel records; however, two endorsements related to the action are present.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2013 | 20130007996
He completed his basic training at Fort Bliss, Texas and was transferred to Fort Sam Houston, Texas for his advanced individual training (AIT). There is no evidence to show that he applied to the Army Discharge Review Board for an upgrade of his discharge within that boards 15-year statute of limitations. When authorized, it is issued to a Soldier whose military record is satisfactory but not sufficiently meritorious to warrant an honorable discharge.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2003 | 2003083626C070212
APPLICANT REQUESTS: In three separate applications, that his undesirable discharge be upgraded to an honorable or a general discharge. The psychology specialist went on to state that the applicant was sent to Fort Ord as a rehabilitative measure and that his continued use of marijuana and by continuing to receive Article 15’s shows that he is unable to copy with the rigors of the military. He had NJP imposed against him on seven separate occasions for his acts of misconduct and his actions...
ARMY | BCMR | CY1997 | 9708814C070209
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 discharge be upgraded based on his Vietnam service. On 21 August 1969 the applicant accepted his second NJP for failing to go to his prescribed place of duty, day guard duty. On 6 July 1971 the applicants unit commander advised the applicant of his intent to initiate...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100023658
After hearing all of the testimony and reviewing all of the available evidence the board of officers recommended that the applicant be discharged for unfitness and that he be issued an Undesirable Discharge Certificate. Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 3-7b, provides that a general discharge is a separation from the Army under honorable conditions. When authorized, it is issued to a Soldier whose military record is satisfactory but not sufficiently meritorious to warrant an honorable discharge.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002067835C070402
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 corrected without a formal hearing, or to deny the application without a formal hearing if it is...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2005 | 20050003250C070206
Edward E. Montgomery | |Member | The Board considered the following evidence: Exhibit A - Application for correction of military records. There is no evidence in the available records to show that he ever applied to the Army Discharge Review Board for an upgrade of his discharge within that board’s 15-year statute of limitations. Records show the applicant should have discovered the alleged error or injustice now under consideration on 5 November 1969; therefore, the time for the applicant...
ARMY | BCMR | CY1996 | 9608358C070209
The separation authority waived further rehabilitation, approved the recommended separation and directed that the applicant receive an undesirable discharge. On 11 December 1979 the Army Discharge Review Board denied the applicant's request for upgrade of his discharge. However, they are not supported by either evidence submitted with the application or the evidence of record.
ARMY | BCMR | CY1997 | 9708814
MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: DOCKET NUMBER: AC97-08814 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. Mr.ChairpersonMr.MemberMr.Member Also present, without vote, were: Mr.Loren G. HarrellDirectorMr.Joseph A. AdrianceAnalyst The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein. In...