| Mr. Carl W. S. Chun | Director | |
| Ms. Deborah L. Brantley | Senior Analyst |
| Mr. Arthur A. Omartian | Chairperson | |
| Mr. Lester Echols | Member | |
| Mr. John T. Meixell | Member |
APPLICANT REQUESTS: That his under other than honorable conditions discharge be upgraded to a general discharge.
APPLICANT STATES: In effect, that while at times he believes he should live with his actions, he does feel that he has done his time, stayed out of trouble, paid taxes, and tried to help out where and when needed. He cites past presidential pardon actions and contends that what he did was not "anywhere close" to what those individuals, who received pardons, did. He states that he put himself through a trade school, worked for the University of Oregon bowling alley from 1984 until 1999 when they removed the lanes and put in a computer lab. He notes that in 1980 he wrote a manual about running a Century 2000 Lane and started a carpet-cleaning program at the University of Oregon. The applicant indicates that he is not able to send in any statements of support because friends from his past have moved on and although he tried to locate them, he was unable to do so. He states today he keeps pretty much to himself. He states the only reason he is asking for an upgrade is for himself, "nothing more." He notes that he has lived with this for 29 years and has nothing to gain. Other than his self-authored statement, he submits no evidence in support of his request.
EVIDENCE OF RECORD: The applicant's military records show:
He entered active duty on 18 December 1970 at the age of 17, with 9 years of formal education, and a GT (general technical) score of 81. He successfully completed basic training and in March 1971, while undergoing advanced individual training, he departed AWOL (absent without leave). He returned to military control in April 1971 and was convicted by a summary court-martial.
The applicant then went on to successfully complete advanced individual training and in September 1971 was assigned to Fort Hood, Texas as a truck driver. Prior to departing AWOL from Fort Hood, in May 1972, the applicant had received excellent conduct and efficiency ratings. The applicant was dropped from the rolls of the Army in June 1972 and in September 1972 returned to military control.
When charges were preferred, the applicant consulted with counsel and voluntarily requested discharge for the good of the service in lieu of trial by court-martial. His request acknowledged he understood the nature and consequences of the undesirable discharge, which he might receive. He indicated he understood he could be denied some or all veterans' benefits as a result of his
discharge and that he may be deprived of rights and benefits as a veteran under both Federal and State law. In a statement submitted on his own behalf, the applicant indicated that he started using drugs during advanced individual training and departed AWOL because his sister was pregnant and the father of the child would not marry her or support her. He stated that while assigned to Fort Hood he continued to use drugs "because life was dull" and he finally "got tired of field duty" and departed AWOL again. He indicated that he was requesting the discharge because he "couldn't stand going to the stockade."
His separation physical examination makes no mention of drug use and found him medically qualified for "duty or separation."
The applicant's request for separation was approved and on 25 October 1972 he was discharged under other than honorable conditions under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, Chapter 10.
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 have been 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.
The applicant's petition to the Army Discharge Review Board (ADRB), to have his discharge upgraded, was denied in 1976, 1977 and after a personal appearance board in 1978. Following his 1978 denial it appears that a Veterans' Service Organization requested a second personal appearance and included evidence that the applicant had some alcohol and anger issues which should have been taken into consideration by the ADRB. There is no indication that a second appearance was granted.
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. While the Board has considered the applicant’s claimed good post-service conduct, this factor, either individually or in sum, warrants the relief requested.
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 this 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
__AAO__ __LE ___ __JTM __ DENY APPLICATION
| CASE ID | AR2001056915 |
| SUFFIX | |
| RECON | YYYYMMDD |
| DATE BOARDED | 20011127 |
| TYPE OF DISCHARGE | (HD, GD, UOTHC, UD, BCD, DD, UNCHAR) |
| DATE OF DISCHARGE | YYYYMMDD |
| DISCHARGE AUTHORITY | AR . . . . . |
| DISCHARGE REASON | |
| BOARD DECISION | DENY |
| REVIEW AUTHORITY | |
| ISSUES 1. | 110.00 |
| 2. | |
| 3. | |
| 4. | |
| 5. | |
| 6. |
ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100023804
The applicant requests a discharge upgrade. The applicant was AWOL from his unit in Vietnam. The facts of this case do not add up, for example: * the MACV Form 439-R shows the applicant went on R&R leave to Hawaii from 5-18 March 1972 * travel from Hawaii to CONUS was expressly prohibited * the applicant states his leave was to visit his ailing mother in TX and was extended through 1 April 1972 * AWOL charges were from 2 April 1972 to 4 May 1972 * he states he turned himself in to military...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2001 | 2001056209C070420
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. On 29 February 1972 the separation authority approved the applicant’s request for discharge and directed that he be furnished an undesirable discharge. Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 3-7, provides that an honorable discharge is a separation with honor and entitles the recipient to benefits provided by law.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2007 | 20070018800
THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE: 1. On 28 February 1975, the applicant reaffirmed his allegiance to the United States of America and pledged to complete alternate service. On 28 February 1975, the applicant was discharged, with an undesirable discharge and a characterization of service of under other than honorable conditions, under the provisions of PP 4313.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2013 | 20130021885
The applicant requests his undesirable discharge be upgraded to an honorable discharge. In that statement he indicated: * he had been working to help support his mother and two little brothers prior to his being drafted in May 1971 * his mother passed away from cancer and he went into the Army * he went to Fort Ord for advanced individual training and got married in July 1971 * he then went to the Oakland Replacement Station where he went AWOL on 22 October 1971 * he was returned to Fort...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090019765
On 22 November 1972, the applicant consulted with counsel and requested discharge for the good of the service under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations), chapter 10. The discharge orders and the applicant's DD Form 214 show he was separated with an undesirable discharge on 11 January 1973 under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 10, for the good of the service. ___________x______________ CHAIRPERSON I certify that herein is recorded the true and...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2012 | 20120002174
On 27 July 1973, The Adjutant General informed the applicant the Army Discharge Review Board had denied his request for a change in the type and nature of his discharge. The evidence of record does not support the applicant's request for an upgrade of his discharge to a GD. The available record shows he was age 20 at the time of his offenses.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2001 | 2001055046C070420
On 22 October 1975, he received a full pardon (grant of executive clemency) under Presidential Proclamation 4313. The Clemency Discharge is a neutral discharge, issued neither under “honorable conditions” nor under “other than honorable conditions.” A Clemency Discharge does not affect the underlying discharge and does not entitle the individual to any benefits administered by the Department of Veterans Affairs (formerly Veterans Administration). The applicant’s voluntary request for...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2012 | 20120003095
Chapter 10 of the version in effect at the time provided that a member who committed an offense or offenses for which the authorized punishment included a punitive discharge, could submit a request for discharge for the good of the service at any time after court-martial charges were preferred. His service record shows he received one Article 15, a letter of reprimand, a bar to reenlistment, and he had 86 days of lost time. His service record is void of evidence which supports his...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2006 | 20060015480
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 31 May 2007 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20060015480 I certify that hereinafter is recorded the true and complete record of the proceedings of the Army Board for Correction of Military Records in the case of the above-named individual. The applicant's records contain Headquarters, 101st Airborne Division Support Command (Airmobile) Special Court-Martial Order Number 56, dated 5 August 1971, that vacated suspension of the unserved portion of 4 months...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002067677C070402
On 7 November 1974 the Army Discharge Review Board denied the applicant's request for an upgrade of his discharge. 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 decoration other than a service...