| Mr. Carl W. S. Chun | Director | |
| Ms. Wanda L. Waller | Analyst |
| Mr. Raymond J. Wagner | Chairperson | |
| Mr. Kenneth W. Lapin | Member | |
| Ms. Paula Mokulis | Member |
APPLICANT REQUESTS: That his general discharge be upgraded to honorable.
APPLICANT STATES: In effect, that while stationed in Germany he was falsely accused of committing armed robbery against a German civilian. He contends that the victim of the robbery picked him out of a lineup; however, he had nothing to do with the robbery. He states that he was restricted to the barracks for approximately five weeks and placed on lousy details until he was deported back to the states. He also states that he doesn’t know if his name was cleared of that incident but he does know that he was discharged under honorable conditions and not with an honorable discharge. He further contends that employment opportunities have been affected by “something that happened” while he was in the military in Germany. In support of his application, he submits an undated letter of explanation.
EVIDENCE OF RECORD: The applicant's military records show:
The applicant was inducted in the Army of the United States on 14 August 1959 and was honorably discharged on 23 October 1959 to enlist in the Regular Army. He enlisted in the Regular Army on 24 October 1959 for a period of 3 years. The applicant was transferred to Germany for duty as an ammunition storage helper on 24 January 1960.
The applicant’s Service Record shows that he had one day lost due to being absent without leave on 3 January 1962.
Unit Orders Number 46, dated 9 August 1962, show nonjudicial punishment was imposed against the applicant for misconduct effective 9 August 1962. His punishment consisted of a reduction from private first class (E-3) to private (E-2). No other details were available in the applicant’s personnel service records.
Records show the applicant returned to the United States in October 1962. On
9 October 1962 the applicant was released from active duty with a general discharge under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-205 for early release of overseas returnees and transferred to the U.S. Army Reserve (USAR). On
31 July 1965 the applicant was discharged from the USAR with a general discharge.
There is no evidence in the available records which shows the applicant was accused of or convicted of armed robbery.
There is no evidence in the available records which shows the applicant applied to the Army Discharge Review Board within its 15-year statute of limitations.
Army Regulation 635-205, in effect at the time, set forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel for convenience of the government. Paragraph 7 governs separation of enlisted personnel with less than 3 months remaining to serve. Paragraph 7(a) pertains to overseas returnees. It states, in pertinent part, that commanders are authorized to order separation for the convenience of the government of enlisted personnel for return to the US. Enlisted members of the Regular Army and USAR, who upon arrival have less than 3 months remaining before expiration of term of service (ETS) will be discharged for the convenience of the government, released from active duty, and returned to their former National Guard or Army Reserve status, or released from active duty and transferred to the USAR. This regulation states that a discharge certificate based upon the character of service rendered will be issued to the individual concerned.
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 Board considered the applicant’s contentions that while he was stationed in Germany he was falsely accused of committing armed robbery against a German civilian, that he was restricted to the barracks and was placed on lousy details until he was deported back to the states. However, there is no evidence of record, and the applicant has provided no evidence, to support these contentions.
2. Evidence of record shows that nonjudicial punishment was imposed against the applicant for misconduct on 9 August 1962.
3. Evidence of record also shows the applicant was discharged under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-205 for early separation of overseas returnees and not as the result of misconduct.
4. In the absence of evidence to the contrary, it must be presumed that the applicant’s under honorable conditions (general discharge) was based upon his character of service as determined by the appropriate discharge authority in accordance with the governing regulation in effect at the time.
5. The Board considered the applicant’s contention that he needs his discharge upgraded to honorable for employment opportunities. However, the Board does not grant relief solely for the purpose of gaining employment or enhancing employment opportunities.
6. The applicant has failed to convince the Board through the evidence submitted or the evidence of record that his discharge was unjust and should be upgraded.
7. 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.
8. 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
RJW____ KWL____ PM______ DENY APPLICATION
| CASE ID | AR2001057420 |
| SUFFIX | |
| RECON | |
| DATE BOARDED | 20010920 |
| TYPE OF DISCHARGE | (GD) |
| DATE OF DISCHARGE | 19621009 |
| DISCHARGE AUTHORITY | AR 635-205 |
| DISCHARGE REASON | Early release of overseas returnees |
| BOARD DECISION | (DENY) |
| REVIEW AUTHORITY | |
| ISSUES 1. | 110.0200 |
| 2. | |
| 3. | |
| 4. | |
| 5. | |
| 6. |
ARMY | BCMR | CY2003 | 2003086831C070212
In accordance with Army Regulation 15-185, the application and the available military records pertinent to the corrective action requested were reviewed to determine whether to authorize a formal hearing, recommend that the records be corrected without a formal hearing, or to deny the application without a formal hearing if it is determined that insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate the existence of probable material error or injustice. The applicant requests...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140021330
The applicant requests an upgrade of his general discharge to an honorable discharge. The wrongful use of marijuana allegation was contained in a Report of Investigation, 50th Military Police Detachment, Headquarters, Fort Amador, CZ, dated 22 March 1962. c. The Commander proposed to reduce the applicant for inefficiency under the provisions of paragraph 30d, Army Regulation 624-200. d. The applicant was instructed to acknowledge receipt of the letter and to submit any matters deemed...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | 20110019611
Application for correction of military records (with supporting documents provided, if any). The applicant's military record is not available to the Board for review. This case is being considered using reconstructed records which primarily consists of the NA Form 13038 and DD Form 256A provided by the applicant and a DA Form 2139 (Military Pay Voucher) in the applicant's NPRC file.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090001935
The applicant requests, in effect, that he be awarded the Armed Forces Expeditionary Medal and that it be added to his DD Form 214 (Armed Forces of the United States Report of Transfer or Discharge). Section 5 (Service Outside Continental United States) of the applicant's DA Form 24 shows that during the period he was ordered to active duty he had no overseas service. The evidence shows the applicant served on active duty for the period from 23 April 1959 through 12 April 1961 and for the...
ARMY | BCMR | CY1996 | 9605770C070209
The applicant requests that the 355 days he served on active duty while in the Regular Army be considered qualifying for retired pay. The applicant states that he arrived back in the United States from Germany and was released from active duty 10 days prior to the expiration of his term of service (ETS). It would be inherently unjust not to count 355 days of continuous active duty as qualifying for retired pay when the soldier had no choice in the separation and it was for and at the...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2005 | AR20050015776C070206
John Heck | |Member | The Board considered the following evidence: Exhibit A - Application for correction of military records. The applicant states that he should have received an honorable discharge for his service because he served honorably. There is no evidence in the available records to show that 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 | CY2002 | 2002078566C070215
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: The evidence of record confirms that the applicant’s acts of misconduct, lack of motivation, inadaptability, and absence of interest resulted in him being barred from reenlistment.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090006450
The applicant's records show he enlisted in the Regular Army for a period of 3 years on 10 April 1959. The issuance of the Cold War Certificate is not within this Board's authority. For Army personnel, the National Personnel Records Center will verify the awards to which a veteran is entitled and forward the request with the verification to the appropriate service department for issuance of the medals.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140001434
The applicant requests correction of his DD Form 214 (Armed Forces of the United States Report of Transfer or Discharge) to show award of the Overseas Service Ribbon. A review of the applicant's military service records failed to reveal evidence that he served in an active status in any component of the U.S. Army on or after 1 April 1981 or that he was authorized the Overseas Service Ribbon. The evidence of record also shows the Overseas Service Ribbon may be awarded retroactively to those...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2015 | 20150002904
His records contain his DA Form 24 (Service Record). He was given a dishonorable discharge pursuant to a general court-martial empowered to adjudge such a discharge. His conviction and discharge were effected in accordance with applicable laws and regulations and his discharge appropriately characterizes the misconduct for which he was convicted.