| Mr. Carl W. S. Chun | Director | |
| Ms. Deyon D. Battle | Analyst |
| Ms. Sherri V. Ward | Chairperson | |
| Mr. James E. Anderholm | Member | |
| Mr. George D. Paxson | Member |
APPLICANT REQUESTS: That his general discharge be upgraded to an honorable discharge.
APPLICANT STATES: In effect, that the type of discharge he received was too harsh considering the nature of his offenses. He also states that he is overdue filing his appeal to this Board because he has been in prison for the last 25 years.
EVIDENCE OF RECORD: The applicant's military records show:
On 11 May 1972, he enlisted in the Army for 3 years in the pay grade of E-1. He successfully completed his training as a cannoneer. On 11 September 1972, he was promoted to the pay grade of E-2.
On 30 January 1973, he was honorably discharged for the purpose of immediate reenlistment. He reenlisted in the Army for 4 years on 31 January 1973.
Nonjudicial punishment (NJP) was imposed against the applicant on 23 May 1973, for being absent without leave (AWOL) from 1 May until 21 May 1973. His punishment consisted of 15 days in correctional custody.
On 31 October 1973, the applicant was convicted by a special court-martial of striking a noncommissioned officer (NCO). His sentence consisted of confinement at hard labor, a reduction in pay grade and a forfeiture of pay.
On 1 February 1974, NJP was imposed against him for violating a general regulation by not having a pass authorizing him to be out of the unit area. His punishment consisted of a forfeiture of pay, restriction and extra duty.
On 15 February 1974, the applicant was notified that action to eliminate him from the Army under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 13 for unfitness had been initiated. He acknowledged receipt of the notification and, after consulting with counsel, he requested consideration of his case before a board of officers.
A board of officers convened on 22 March 1974, to determine whether the applicant should remain in the service or be administratively separated. The board found that he had demonstrated that he did not have the ability to expend efforts constructively in a normal military environment. The board further found that he was unsuitable for military service because of inaptitude. The board recommended that he be eliminated from the service for unsuitability with the issuance of a General Discharge Certificate.
The appropriate authority approved the recommendation for discharge on 28 March 1974. Accordingly, on 1 April 1974, the applicant was discharged under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 13 for unsuitability. At the time of his separation he had completed a total of 1 year, 4 months and
13 days of active service and had accrued 169 days of lost time due to AWOL.
There is no evidence of record that shows that the applicant ever applied to the Army Discharge Review Board for an upgrade of his discharge within that board’s 15-year statute of limitations.
Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 13 in effect at the time, established policy and provided guidance for eliminating enlisted personnel found to be unfit or unsuitable for further military service. Action will be taken to separate an individual for unsuitability when it is clearly established that it is unlikely the he will develop sufficiently to participate in further military training and/or become a satisfactory soldier.
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 applicant's administrative separation was accomplished in compliance with applicable regulations with no indication of procedural errors which would tend to jeopardize his rights.
2. The type of discharge directed and the reasons therefor were appropriate considering all the facts of the case.
3. The evidence of record clearly shows that the applicant was convicted by a special court-martial of striking an NCO and he had NJP imposed against him twice for acts of misconduct which resulted in his having 169 days of lost time due to AWOL and confinement. It does not appear that his general discharge was too harsh, as his service cannot be considered as completely honorable.
4. 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 this requirement.
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
__ja ____ ___sw___ ___gp___ DENY APPLICATION
| CASE ID | AR2001051897 |
| SUFFIX | |
| RECON | YYYYMMDD |
| DATE BOARDED | 2001/04/10 |
| TYPE OF DISCHARGE | GD |
| DATE OF DISCHARGE | 1974/00/131 |
| DISCHARGE AUTHORITY | AR 635-300 |
| DISCHARGE REASON | 547 |
| BOARD DECISION | DENY |
| REVIEW AUTHORITY | |
| ISSUES 1. 556 | 144.4100.0000 |
| 2. | |
| 3. | |
| 4. | |
| 5. | |
| 6. |
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002072065C070403
The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein. EVIDENCE OF RECORD : The applicant's military records show: On 24 January 1974, the commander submitted the recommendation for discharge and indicated that the applicant had been a total failure as a soldier.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2001 | 2001060810C070421
The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein. He was convicted of disrespect, disobedience, and failure to go to his appointed place of duty on 8 and 14 July 1975, and sentenced to reduction to private/E-1, forfeiture of $100.00 pay per month for 6 months, confinement at hard labor for 3 months, and a BCD. DISCUSSION : Considering all the evidence, allegations, and information presented by the applicant, together...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2003 | 2003091812C070212
However, there is no evidence of record that shows the punishment imposed. A review of the available records fails to show that the applicant ever applied to the Army Discharge Review Board for an upgrade of his discharge within that board’s 15-year statute of limitations. The Board determined that the evidence presented and the merits of this case are insufficient to warrant the relief requested, and therefore, it would not be in the interest of justice to excuse the applicant's failure...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002072297C070403
Although not explained in the available records, the applicant’s commander at Fort Bragg also initiated a bar to reenlistment against him on 18 September 1973. He had used drugs and had been counseled by his chain of command, yet he had failed to submit to his drug problem with “Operation Awareness”, “Mental Hygiene” and “Quarter Ward.” While the Board recognizes that he did serve two tours in Vietnam, his record of service during his second tour and his conduct after returning from...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002070892C070402
EVIDENCE OF RECORD : The applicant's military records show: On that same date, the applicant's commander recommended that the applicant be eliminated from the military. He had completed 1 year, 10 months and 4 days of creditable active military service and he had 81 days of lost time due to being in military confinement.
ARMY | BCMR | CY1997 | 199709470C070209
The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein. On 3 February 1972 the Army Discharge Review Board (ADRB) denied his request to upgrade his discharge. BOARD VOTE: ________ ________ ________ GRANT ________ ________ ________ GRANT FORMAL HEARING __jev____ _mkp ___ __jhk ___ DENY APPLICATION Loren G. Harrell Director INDEX CASE ID AC97-09470/AR1998011427 SUFFIX RECON DATE BOARDED 1999/01/27 TYPE OF DISCHARGE UOTHC DATE OF...
ARMY | BCMR | CY1997 | 199709470
The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein. On 3 February 1972 the Army Discharge Review Board (ADRB) denied his request to upgrade his discharge. This law, enacted on 8 October 1977, provided generally, that no VA benefits could be granted based on any discharge upgraded under the Ford memorandum of 19 January 1977, or the DOD Special Discharge Review Program.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080018224
The applicant requests, in effect, that his undesirable discharge be upgraded to an honorable or a general discharge. When authorized, it is issued to a Soldier whose military record is satisfactory but not sufficiently meritorious to warrant an honorable discharge. The evidence of record shows that he was convicted by a special court-martial and he had NJP imposed against him for striking other Soldiers.
ARMY | BCMR | CY1997 | 199710923C070209
M Member The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein. However, there is no evidence of record, nor has the applicant submitted any evidence to support his contention that he had a medical condition that was ignored at the time of his discharge from the Army or that he was assigned an MOS that he had not requested. BOARD VOTE: ________ ________ ________ GRANT ________ ________ ________ GRANT FORMAL HEARING __ro ____...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2004 | 20040010782C070208
Richard T. Dunbar | |Member | The Board considered the following evidence: Exhibit A - Application for correction of military records. During the counseling he was informed that he was being considered for elimination from the military based on his continuous offenses of misconduct. Accordingly, on 6 November 1989, the applicant was discharged under honorable conditions (general), under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 14, based on misconduct-commission of a serious offense.