| Mr. | Chairperson | ||
| Mr. | Member | ||
| Mr. | Member |
| Mr. | Karl F. Schneider | Acting Director | |
| Analyst |
APPLICANT REQUESTS: In effect, that his undesirable discharge (UD) be upgraded to honorable.
APPLICANT STATES: In effect, that at the time of his discharge he did not fully understand the degree of the charges.
EVIDENCE OF RECORD: The applicant's military records show:
On 28 June 1974 the applicant entered the Regular Army for a period of 3 years at age 19.
The applicant's record is void of any significant acts of achievement, valor, or service meriting special recognition. The record documents only one award, the National Defense Service Medal. However, there is documented evidence that the applicant had a history of disciplinary infractions.
On 21 November 1974 the applicant accepted nonjudicial punishment (NJP), under the provisions of Article 15 of the UCMJ, for violation of Article 90 (disobeying a lawful command). His punishment for this offense was forfeiture of $80.00; 14 days restriction; and 14 days of extra duty.
On 13 December 1974 the applicant was tried by special court-martial for violation of Article 134 (receiving stolen money) of the UCMJ. He plead guilty and was sentenced to confinement at hard labor for 75 days; reduction to private/E-1; and forfeiture of $100.00 per month for
2 months.
On 21 July 1975 the applicant accepted NJP for two specifications of violation of Article 86 (1. absent from appointed place of duty/2. missing guard mount). His punishment was 7 days of extra duty and forfeiture of $75.00.
The evidence of record indicates that on 23 September 1975
a DD Form 458 (Charge Sheet) was prepared preferring a court-martial charge against the applicant for two specifications of violation of Article 86 (AWOL). The first specification was for a period of AWOL between 13 and 29 August 1975 and the second specification was for an AWOL period between 2 and 19 September 1975.
The record also contains documented evidence that on
25 September 1975 the applicant voluntarily requested discharge for the good of the service, under the provisions of Chapter 10 of AR 635-200, in lieu of trial by court-martial. This request was made after the applicant had been advised by counsel of the basis for his contemplated trial by court-martial, the maximum permissible punishment, and of the possible effects of a UD. The applicant also attested to the fact that he fully understood he would be deprived of many or all Army benefits, that he may be ineligible for many or all benefits administered by the Department of Veterans Affairs, and that he may be deprived of veterans benefits under state and federal law. The applicant also stated that he had no further desire to perform military service.
On 23 October 1975 the appropriate authority approved the applicant's request for discharge and directed issuance of a UD. Accordingly, on 5 November 1975 the applicant was discharged after completing 1 year, 3 months, and 4 days of active military service, and accruing 35 days of time lost due to AWOL and confinement.
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 are preferred, submit a request for discharge for the good of the service in lieu of trial by court-martial. A discharge under other than honorable conditions is normally considered appropriate. However, at the time of the applicant's separation the regulation provided for the issuance of a UD.
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. There was no evidence of record to support the applicant’s contention that he did not fully understand the degree of the charges against him at the time of his discharge. In fact, the evidence of record shows the applicant was charged with the commission of an offense punishable under the UCMJ with a punitive discharge and after consulting with legal counsel, he voluntarily, and in writing, requested separation from the Army in lieu of trial by court-martial. In doing so, the applicant admitted guilt to the stipulated offense under the UCMJ.
2. 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.
3. 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.
4. 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
Karl F. Schneider
Acting Director
ARMY | BCMR | CY1997 | 9710966
APPLICANT STATES : In effect, that at the time of his discharge he did not fully understand the degree of the charges. The evidence of record indicates that on 23 September 1975 a DD Form 458 (Charge Sheet) was prepared preferring a court-martial charge against the applicant for two specifications of violation of Article 86 (AWOL). 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...
ARMY | BCMR | CY1997 | 9707477
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. EVIDENCE OF RECORD : The applicant's military records show: 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 are preferred, submit a request for discharge for the...
ARMY | BCMR | CY1997 | 9709513
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 considered the following evidence: 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...
ARMY | BCMR | CY1997 | 9707477C070209
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 honorable for convenience of the government. There is no indication in the record that the applicant was ever diagnosed with a mental illness by medical authorities; in addition, the applicant never raised mental illness as an issue...
ARMY | BCMR | CY1997 | 9711291
The record also contains documented evidence that on 1 November 1974 the applicant voluntarily requested discharge for the good of the service under the provisions of chapter 10 of AR 635-200 and acknowledged that he was guilty of the charges against him. On 28 April 1975 the appropriate authority approved the applicant's request for discharge and directed issuance of a UD. The applicant’s contention that he was coerced by superior officers to leave the military is not supported by either...
ARMY | BCMR | CY1997 | 9711741
EVIDENCE OF RECORD : The applicant's military records show: 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 are preferred, submit a request for discharge for the good of the service in lieu of trial by court martial. The Board found no evidence of record or independent evidence submitted by the applicant which supported his...
ARMY | BCMR | CY1997 | 9707418
The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein. 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 are preferred, submit a request for discharge for the good of the service in lieu of trial by court-martial. The applicant was charged with the commission of...
ARMY | BCMR | CY1997 | 9711253
The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein. The applicant states in effect, that his 201 file did not correctly capture his Vietnam era service and that his record does not include the reasons for his AWOL. On 4 September 1975 the applicant applied to the Army Discharge Review Board (ADRB)for upgrade of his discharge and was denied.
ARMY | BCMR | CY1997 | 9705757
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: On 25 January 1972 the Army Discharge Review Board denied the applicant's request for an upgrade to his discharge and found that the discharge process was proper in all respects. Chapter 10 of that regulation provides, in pertinent part, that a member who has committed an offense or offenses for which the authorized punishment...
ARMY | BCMR | CY1997 | 9709513C070209
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). 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...