| Mr. Carl W. S. Chun | Director | |
| Ms. Beverly A. Young | Analyst |
| Mr. Raymond J. Wagner | Chairperson | |
| Ms. Kathleen A. Newman | Member | |
| Mr. Ronald E. Blakely | Member |
APPLICANT REQUESTS: That his under other than honorable conditions discharge be upgraded to an honorable discharge.
APPLICANT STATES: That he was having marital problems at the time. He feels that the punishment was too harsh.
COUNSEL CONTENDS: The American Legion, as counsel for the applicant, notes that the applicant maintains that his discharge is too harsh and that his over-all service is more deserving of an honorable type discharge. Counsel further notes that the applicant indicates that he experienced marital problems that diminished his ability to serve.
EVIDENCE OF RECORD: The applicant's military records show:
The applicant enlisted in the Regular Army on 4 June 1973 for a period of three years. He successfully completed basic and advanced individual training and was assigned to Fort Bragg, North Carolina.
On 5 February 1974, the applicant was punished under Article 15, Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) for leaving his appointed place of duty without authority and failing to go to his appointed place of duty.
On 21 May 1974, the applicant received a second Article 15 for failing to go to his appointed place of duty. He received another Article 15 in June 1974 for being absent from his unit on two occasions.
On 29 August 1974, the applicant was convicted by a special court-martial of being absent from his unit twice, being absent without leave (AWOL) from 26 July 1974 to 28 July 1974 and from 2 August 1974 to 5 August 1974, and failing to go to his appointed place of duty. He was sentenced to confinement at hard labor for 40 days (suspended for 60 days).
On 15 January 1975, charges were preferred against the applicant for two periods of AWOL from 25 October 1974 to 19 November 1974 and from
6 to 11 December 1974. On the same day, the applicant consulted with legal counsel and voluntarily requested discharge for the good of the service in lieu of trial by court-martial under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 10. In doing so, he admitted guilt to the offenses charged and acknowledged that he might encounter substantial prejudice in civilian life and that he might be ineligible for many or all benefits administered by the Veterans Administration (VA) if an undesirable discharge were issued. The applicant did not submit a statement in his own behalf.
On 21 January 1975, the separation authority approved the applicant’s request for discharge and directed issuance of an undesirable discharge.
The applicant was discharged on 11 February 1975 under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 10, for the good of the service in lieu of trial by court-martial. He had 1 year, 7 months and 7 days of creditable service with 39 days of lost time.
Prior to his discharge, the applicant underwent a separation medical examination and was found fit for separation.
On 6 July 1982, the Army Discharge Review Board (ADRB), by unanimous vote, denied the applicant’s request for upgrade of his discharge.
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. However, at the time of the applicant's separation the regulation provided for the issuance of an undesirable 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:
1. The applicant's voluntary request for separation under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 10, for the good of the service, to avoid trial by court-martial, was administratively correct and in conformance with applicable regulations. There is no indication that the request was made under coercion or duress.
2. The applicant was advised of the effects of an undesirable discharge and that he might be deprived of many or all Army and VA benefits. He was afforded the opportunity to submit statements in his own behalf, but he declined to do so.
3. The contentions of the applicant and his counsel have been noted by the Board. However, they are not supported by either evidence submitted with the application or the evidence of record. The discharge process was in accordance with applicable law and regulations and the applicant's service was appropriately characterized.
4. In view of the applicant's numerous acts of indiscipline, it does not appear that his undesirable discharge was too severe.
5. 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.
6. 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____ KAN_____ REB____ DENY APPLICATION
| CASE ID | AR2001059780 |
| SUFFIX | |
| RECON | YYYYMMDD |
| DATE BOARDED | 20011025 |
| TYPE OF DISCHARGE | UOTHC |
| DATE OF DISCHARGE | 19750604 |
| DISCHARGE AUTHORITY | AR635-200,chapter 10 |
| DISCHARGE REASON | For the Good of the Service |
| BOARD DECISION | DENY |
| REVIEW AUTHORITY | |
| ISSUES 1. | 144.0000 |
| 2. | |
| 3. | |
| 4. | |
| 5. | |
| 6. |
ARMY | BCMR | CY2015 | 20150001726
The applicant's request for discharge states he was not subjected to coercion with respect to his request for discharge. The applicant's DD Form 214 (Report of Separation from Active Duty) shows he entered active duty this period on 30 April 1971 and he was discharged on 30 July 1975 under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 10, for the good of the service in lieu of trial by court-martial, with an under other than honorable conditions characterization of service. The...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | 20110023599
The applicant requests upgrade of his undesirable discharge to a general discharge. On 14 July 1981, after careful consideration of the applicant's military records and all other available evidence, the Army Discharge Review Board determined he was properly discharged. __________X_____________ CHAIRPERSON I certify that herein is recorded the true and complete record of the proceedings of the Army Board for Correction of Military Records in this case.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080011434
THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE: 1. Title 10, U.S. Code, section 1552(b), provides that applications for correction of military records must be filed within 3 years after discovery of the alleged error or injustice. However, at the time of the applicants separation the regulation provided for the issuance of an undesirable discharge.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100007735
On 15 August 1975, the separation authority approved the applicant's request for discharge and directed issuance of an Undesirable Discharge Certificate. When authorized, it is issued to a Soldier whose military record is satisfactory but not sufficiently meritorious to warrant an honorable discharge. _______ _ _X ______ ___ CHAIRPERSON I certify that herein is recorded the true and complete record of the proceedings of the Army Board for Correction of Military Records in this case.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090021753
On 5 November 1975, after consulting with counsel, the applicant submitted a request for discharge under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations - Enlisted Personnel), chapter 10, for the good of the service - in lieu of court-martial. There is no evidence that the applicant applied to the Army Discharge Review Board for upgrade of his discharge within its 15-year statute of limitations. An undesirable discharge certificate would normally be furnished to an...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | 20110001851
The applicant, the widow of a deceased former service member (FSM), requests upgrade of her late husband's undesirable discharge to an honorable discharge. The FSM's court-martial charge sheet is not available; however, on 19 September 1975, after consulting with counsel, he submitted a request for 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. Army...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100022896
On 6 January 1976, after consulting with counsel, the applicant submitted a request for 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. He was separated with an undesirable discharge on 20 February 1976 under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 10, for the good of the service in lieu of trial by court-martial. _______ _ x _______...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | 20110004221
The applicant requests his discharge under other than honorable conditions be changed to show he received a medical discharge. In his request for discharge, he acknowledged he understood if his discharge request were approved, he might be discharged under other than honorable conditions and be furnished an Undesirable Discharge Certificate. With respect to a medical discharge, there is no evidence in the applicant's records and he did not provide any evidence to show he was diagnosed with...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002083076C070215
The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein. APPLICANT REQUESTS: That his undesirable discharge be upgraded to honorable. A condition of submitting such a request is that the individual concerned must admit guilt to the charges against them or of a lesser included offense which authorizes the imposition of a bad conduct or dishonorable discharge and they must indicate that they have been briefed and understand the...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2013 | 20130008698
On 14 February 1975, the applicant was discharged under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 10, for the good of the service in lieu of trial by court-martial with an under other than honorable conditions discharge. Although an honorable or general discharge is authorized, an undesirable discharge was normally considered appropriate at the time of the applicants discharge. ____________x______________ CHAIRPERSON I certify that herein is recorded the true and complete record...