| Mr. Carl W. S. Chun | Director | |
| Mr. Vic Whitney | Analyst |
| Ms. Celia L. Adolphi | Chairperson | |
| Mr. Donald P. Hupman | Member | |
| Mr. Curtis L. Greenway | Member |
APPLICANT REQUESTS: That his discharge under other than honorable conditions be upgraded to a general discharge.
APPLICANT STATES: That he served in Vietnam and received an honorable discharge from his first period of service.
EVIDENCE OF RECORD: The applicant's military records show:
He was inducted at almost 26 years of age and entered active duty on 5 July 1967. He completed infantry training and was assigned to Vietnam from 7 December 1967 to 7 December 1968. He was awarded the Combat Infantryman Badge, the Air Medal, and the Bronze Star Medal for meritorious service. On 21 May 1969, he was honorably discharged in the pay grade of E-5 for the purpose of reenlistment.
The applicant reenlisted for 6 years at Fort Carson, Colorado on 22 May 1969. On 27 October 1969, he was punished under Article 15 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) for five specifications of absence from his place of duty. On 8 May and 29 September 1970, he was again punished under Article 15, UCMJ for absence from his place of duty. The imposed punishment included reduction to the pay grade of E-4. The record shows that the applicant was absent without leave (AWOL) from 25 July to 9 August 1970, but there is no recorded disciplinary action in the available record.
On 13 January 1971, the applicant was again punished under Article 15, UCMJ for 2 days AWOL. The imposed punishment included reduction to the pay grade of E-3. He was AWOL again for 30 days from the overseas replacement station and was punished under Article 15, UCMJ on 9 April 1971. He served again in Vietnam from 10 April 1971 to 16 January 1972. Upon his return from Vietnam he was AWOL for 42 days and was punished under Article 15, UCMJ on 19 May 1972.
The applicant was AWOL again from 30 May to 3 December 1972. A 6 December 1972 FBI deserter report states that the applicant surrendered to military authorities after the FBI visited his residence. Charges were preferred on the applicant for his 189 days AWOL on 7 December 1972.
After consulting with counsel, the applicant submitted a request for discharge in lieu of trial by court-martial. In his request he acknowledged the possible effects of an undesirable discharge and that he might be deprived of many or all Army and Veterans Administration benefits. In an attached statement, the applicant wrote that he was unhappy with the Army now and all the changes since 1967. He was proud of his Vietnam service and should receive a better discharge. The applicant’s chain of command recommended approval of his request and issuance of a undesirable discharge based of his frequent and lengthy absences.
On 16 January 1973, the separation authority, a major general, approved the request for discharge and directed issuance of an Undesirable Discharge Certificate. Effective 13 February 1973, the applicant was separated from active duty in the pay grade of E-1 under the authority of Army Regulation 635-200, in lieu of trial by court-martial. He had 2 years, 10 months, and 21 days creditable service during this enlistment and 301 days lost time.
There is no evidence of record that the applicant applied to the Army Discharge Review Board for an upgrade of his discharge within the established 15-year time limit.
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.
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 request for a discharge, even after appropriate and proper consultation with a military lawyer, tends to show he wished to avoid the court-martial and the punitive discharge that he might have received. His administrative separation was accomplished in compliance with applicable regulations with no indication of procedural errors that would tend to jeopardize his rights. The type of discharge directed and the reasons therefore were appropriate considering all the facts of the case.
2. The Board recognizes the applicant’s Vietnam service with awards of the Combat Infantryman Badge, the Air Medal, the Bronze Star Medal for meritorious service, and his prior honorable discharge. The Board also notes that the applicant was 29 years of age at the time of his first AWOL. In view of the applicant's numerous acts of indiscipline, it does not appear that his discharge under other than honorable conditions was too severe.
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
___ca___ __dh____ ___cg___ DENY APPLICATION
| CASE ID | AR2001057306 |
| SUFFIX | |
| RECON | |
| DATE BOARDED | 20010911 |
| TYPE OF DISCHARGE | |
| DATE OF DISCHARGE | |
| DISCHARGE AUTHORITY | |
| DISCHARGE REASON | |
| BOARD DECISION | DENY |
| REVIEW AUTHORITY | |
| ISSUES 1. | |
| 2. | |
| 3. | |
| 4. | |
| 5. | |
| 6. |
ARMY | BCMR | CY2001 | 2001056168C070420
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 applicant was so discharged on 21 September 1974 with a total of 8 years, 1 month, and 1 day service and 16 days lost time.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2004 | 04100831C070208
The Board considered the following evidence: Exhibit A - Application for correction of military records. He was punished in October 1967 for failing to report to duty, resulting in his reduction to pay grade E-1, and in November 1967 for failing to report to duty and for wearing the insignia of a sergeant (E-5) on his uniform. The applicant's combat decorations are noted, however, evidence available to the Board indicates that the applicant's incidents of misconduct were not limited to his...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2012 | 20120001481
The applicant states he honorably served in Vietnam and he received traumatic brain injuries (TBI). On 12 April 1973, the separation authority approved the applicant's request for discharge under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 10, for the good of the service - in lieu of trial by court-martial. In fact, his military service was marred by misconduct prior to, during, and after his service in Vietnam.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002083168C070215
The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein. The appropriate authority considered the case. Since the Board considers post-service factors as part of the basis when recommending discharge upgrades, the applicant's post-discharge criminal record is relevant.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100015131
His DD Form 214 shows he had completed a total of 6 years, 10 months, and 6 days of creditable service with 388 days of lost time prior to his normal expiration term of service (ETS). The DA Form 20 lists the applicant's periods of lost time as: * 2 - 3 November 1965, 2 days AWOL * 2 - 20 February 1966, 19 day AWOL * 4 April - 17 August 1966, 136 days AWOL * 18 August - 15 December 1966, 120 days in confinement * 25 February 1971 - 29 June 1971, 125 days AWOL [the applicant was assigned to...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2013 | 20130000965
The applicant requests an upgrade of his under other than honorable conditions discharge. On 20 May 1971, court-martial charges were preferred against him for being AWOL from 16 December 1970 to 18 May 1971. The DD Form 214 he was issued shows he was discharged under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 10, for the good of the service in lieu of trial by a court-martial with an Undesirable Discharge Certificate.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002071351C070402
The applicant was 18 years old at the time he entered active duty and had 12 years of formal education. In March 1974 the Army Discharge Review Board denied the applicant's petition to upgrade his discharge. 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:
ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140016115
The military judge gave him a choice between a general discharge and return to service for 6 years to make up the 20 months of AWOL plus a reenlistment time that included 2 years in Vietnam. He served in Vietnam from on or about 20 October 1966 to on or about 22 September 1967. The DD Form 214 he was issued shows he was discharged under the provisions of chapter 10 of Army Regulation 635-200 in lieu of trial by a court-martial with an under other than honorable conditions discharge.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140014096
THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE: 1. On 29 June 1973, he was discharged accordingly. There is no indication he applied to the Army Discharge Review Board for an upgrade of his discharge within that board's 15-year statute of limitations.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2003 | 2003083710C070212
The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein. The evidence of record shows that on 10 September 1975, the applicant consulted with counsel and submitted a request for discharge for the good of the service. On his return from Vietnam, he was assigned to Fort Sill and was again assigned to run a supply room.