| Mr. Carl W. S. Chun | Director | |
| Mr. Vic Whitney | Analyst |
| Mr. Walter T. Morrison | Chairperson | |
| Mr. Joe R. Schroeder | Member | |
| Mr. Ronald E. Blakely | Member |
APPLICANT REQUESTS: That his general discharge be upgraded to honorable.
APPLICANT STATES: That he had a reentry code of “1” and received the Good Conduct Medal. He was only punished once under Article 15 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) and was never convicted by a court-martial.
EVIDENCE OF RECORD: The applicant's military records show:
He was inducted and entered active duty on 15 October 1964. He completed training as a combat engineer and was assigned to Fort, Riley, Kansas. He was punished under Article 15, UCMJ, on 8 July 1965, for wrongfully appropriating a military vehicle.
The applicant was assigned to Vietnam as a bridge specialist from September 1965 to September 1966. While there he was punished under Article 15, UCMJ, on four occasions. The offenses included sleeping on guard duty, dereliction of duty, absence from his place of duty, and disobeying a lawful order. He was reduced in grade twice for these offenses.
The applicant was separated from active duty on 5 October 1966 as an overseas returnee with less than 3 months active duty service remaining. His character of service is shown as under honorable conditions with a reentry code of “1”. He was awarded the Good Conduct Medal but no personal decorations are shown in his available records.
Army Regulation 635-200, in effect at the time, provided the policy for separation of enlisted personnel. Chapter one provided the criteria for issuance of honorable and general discharge certificates. Issuance of an honorable discharge was conditioned on proper military behavior and proficient performance of duty during the member’s current period of service. A general discharge was issued to an individual whose military record was not sufficiently meritorious to warrant an honorable discharge. Both an honorable and general discharge entitles the individual to full Federal rights and benefits.
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 contention that he should have an honorable discharge because he only received one punishment under Article 15, UCMJ, is without merit based on the evidence of record. He was punished under Article 15, UCMJ, on five occasions covering a 14-month period of service.
2. The applicant was punished under Article 15, UCMJ, on four occasions in a combat zone. Sleeping on guard duty and dereliction of duty in a combat zone are not considered minor offenses. In view of the applicant's numerous acts of indiscipline, it does not appear that his general discharge was unfair or unjust.
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
__wm____ ___js___ __rb____ DENY APPLICATION
| CASE ID | AR2001056984 |
| SUFFIX | |
| RECON | |
| DATE BOARDED | 20010814 |
| TYPE OF DISCHARGE | GD |
| DATE OF DISCHARGE | 19661005 |
| DISCHARGE AUTHORITY | AR 635-200 |
| DISCHARGE REASON | A07.00 |
| BOARD DECISION | DENY |
| REVIEW AUTHORITY | |
| ISSUES 1. | 110.02 |
| 2. | |
| 3. | |
| 4. | |
| 5. | |
| 6. |
ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090000722
The applicant requests, in effect, an amendment or change to the charge of sleeping on duty in his court-martial orders and his DA Form 2627-1 (Record of Proceedings under Article 15, Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ)). He elected to refuse punishment under Article 15 and was sentenced to reduction to pay grade E-3 and restriction to the company for 60 days. However, the evidence shows he did not appeal the 8 November 1965 Article 15 punishment for sleeping on duty.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2003 | 2003090536C070212
He pled not guilty to the charge of disrespect toward a second lieutenant, his superior officer; not guilty to striking that same officer in the face with his fist; and guilty to sleeping on guard duty. The review indicated that the applicant was then 21 years old, that he had over 1 year and 5 months of service, a 9th grade education, and that his character of service was excellent. That all of the Department of the Army records related to this case be corrected by correcting his 17 April...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2005 | 20050017626C070206
The applicant's record shows he enlisted in the Regular Army and entered active duty on 14 July 1965. The applicant’s separation document confirms he was discharged under the provisions of chapter 10, Army Regulation 635-200, for the good of the service, in lieu of trial by court-martial. 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.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2006 | 20060012713C071029
THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE: 1. The applicant's record shows he enlisted in the Regular Army and entered active duty on 25 September 1964, at the age of 18 years and 10 months. The evidence of record confirms the applicant's separation processing was accomplished in accordance with the applicable regulation in effect at the time.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2001 | 2001062152C070421
The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein. 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: The Board notes that he was 17 years of age at the time he committed his first and second offense, 18 years of age at the time he was convicted by his special and general court-martial,...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090020463
The applicant requests an upgrade of his under other than honorable conditions discharge. On 14 September 1970, the applicant consulted with counsel and voluntarily requested a discharge under the provision of Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations-Enlisted Personnel), chapter 10 (Discharge for the Good of the Service). The evidence of record shows the applicant received six Article 15s and three courts-martial during the period of service under review.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2001 | 2001057468C070420
He also requests that his records be corrected to show that he was awarded the Silver Star and a second Purple Heart. He was honorably released from active duty in the pay grade of E-4 on 17 July 1969 and was transferred to the United States Army Reserve to complete his service obligation. There is no evidence of record nor has the applicant submitted any evidence to show that he was wounded twice while he was in Vietnam and received a second Purple Heart.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2012 | 20120013124
Subsequent to receiving this legal counsel, the applicant voluntarily requested discharge under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations Enlisted Personnel), chapter 10, for the good of the service - in lieu of trial by court-martial. On 29 November 1978, the separation authority approved the applicant's request for discharge and directed he receive an Under Other Than Honorable Conditions Discharge Certificate. On 6 December 1978, the applicant was discharged...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 06981-07
Pursuant to the provisions of reference (a), Petitioner, a former enlisted member of the Marine Corps, applied to this Board requesting an honorable characterization of service vice the under honorable characterization of service that was issued on 29 May 1967.2. The Board is aware that during the time of Petitioner’s service, an honorable characterization of service was normally conditioned upon minimum proficiency and conduct mark averages of 3.8 and 4.0, respectively.CONCLUSION:Upon...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2007 | 20070013857
On 7 September 1965, the applicant was discharged, in pay grade E-1, under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-208 for unfitness, with an undesirable discharge and a characterization of service of under other than honorable conditions. Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 3-7b, provides that a general discharge is a separation from the Army under honorable conditions. Therefore, there is insufficient evidence that would warrant granting the relief requested.