| Mr. Carl W. S. Chun | Director | |
| Mr. Vic Whitney | Analyst |
| Ms. Jennifer L. Prater | Chairperson | |
| Ms. Regan K. Smith | Member | |
| Mr. Melvin H. Meyer | Member |
APPLICANT REQUESTS: That his discharge under other than honorable conditions be upgraded.
APPLICANT STATES: He was as air traffic controller assigned to an artillery unit in Germany with airfield responsibilities. He tried to report unsafe conditions but was prohibited by his unit commander. Even after several close incidents the unit commander would not try to fix the safety issues. He was granted an emergency leave for the illness of his mother. While at home he reported the safety incidents to a Member of Congress. His mother was not improving and he asked for more emergency leave. He never received a response but the Red Cross and his Senator told him not to worry and stay with his mother. He was later arrested and sent to trial.
His two civilian attorneys were not told of the court date and his military attorney was not a lawyer. The only issue that was discussed was a claim that he was a child beater not a deserter. He served 6 months in the stockade and was returned to his unit. His request for a transfer was not approved so he departed absent without leave (AWOL) as his only choice. He was apprehended and assigned as a “discharge clerk” while he awaited trial. He filled out and applied for his own discharge because he did not care what kind of discharge he received.
He has been a model citizen and is a retired steamfitter. He applied for a discharge upgrade many years ago but never heard anything. He is again requesting an upgrade of his discharge.
EVIDENCE OF RECORD: The applicant's military records show:
He reenlisted on 20 March 1963, with 30 months prior Marine Corps service and 2 years Army service. He was trained as both an infantryman and an air traffic controller. He was promoted to the pay grade of E5 effective 19 June 1965. Effective 13 September 1965, he was assigned to Germany as an air traffic controller to an artillery battery.
He was punished under Article 15, of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) on 17 February 1966, for absence from his place of duty. On 6 October 1966, the applicant was convicted by a special court-martial of AWOL from 22 April to 8 September 1966. The applicant’s DA Form 20 shows that he was in the hands of civil authorities (confinement) from 14 to 21 April 1966. He was sentenced to 6 months confinement at hard labor and served 148 days. He was also reduced to the pay grade of E-1.
On 11 March 1967, the applicant was AWOL again. He was apprehended by Federal authorities on 8 February 1968, and returned to military control.
On 17 February 1968, the applicant requested separation based on financial hardship. The unit commander recommended approval but there is no evidence of record that this request was further acted on by the proper authorities.
On 3 April 1968, the applicant was convicted by a special court-martial of 334 days AWOL. The approved sentence included confinement at hard labor for 6 months and a forfeiture of pay.
The facts and circumstances of the applicant’s administrative separation are not in the available record or provided by the applicant. Effective 2 May 1968, the applicant was separated under the authority of Army Regulation 635-212 for unfitness. He had a total of 5 years, 9 months, and 17 days creditable service and 667 days lost time.
Army Regulation 635-212, in effect at the time, provided the policy for the separation of enlisted personnel for unfitness. An individual was subject to separation for unfitness because of frequent incidents of a discreditable nature with civil or military authorities or an established pattern of shirking. When separation for unfitness was warranted an undesirable discharge was normally considered appropriate.
The available records contain a copy of the applicant’s approved emergency leave for an unspecified time in 1962 when he had been assigned to Korea. There is no documentation in the available record to support the applicant’s contentions concerning his mother’s illness, his need to extend his emergency leave, or that his request was never acted on.
There is no evidence of record that the applicant applied to the Army Discharge Review Board for an upgrade of his discharge within the 15-year time limit.
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. In the absence of evidence to the contrary, it is presumed that the discharge proceedings were conducted in accordance with law and regulations applicable at the time. The character of the discharge and the reasons therefore were commensurate with his overall record.
2. His contention that he remained in an AWOL status for almost 5 months while he waited approval of additional emergency leave is without credibility. Additionally, there is no evidence of record to show that he was tried for charges other than AWOL.
3. His claim of good post service conduct is commendable, but it does not serve as an overriding consideration to excuse 667 days of lost time and the granting of a discharge upgrade.
4. 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.
5. 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
__jp___ ___rs____ ___mm_____ DENY APPLICATION
| CASE ID | AR2001060192 |
| SUFFIX | |
| RECON | |
| DATE BOARDED | 20011120 |
| TYPE OF DISCHARGE | UD |
| DATE OF DISCHARGE | 19680502 |
| DISCHARGE AUTHORITY | AR 635-212 |
| DISCHARGE REASON | A54.00 |
| BOARD DECISION | DENY |
| REVIEW AUTHORITY | |
| ISSUES 1. | 110.02 |
| 2. | |
| 3. | |
| 4. | |
| 5. | |
| 6. |
ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | 20110024434
Charges were preferred against the applicant at Fort Riley on 17 March 1971 for being AWOL from 9 October 1969 to 18 September 1970 and 20 October 1970 to 25 February 1971. On 27 June 1977 the applicants discharge was reviewed by the Army Discharge Review Board (ADRB) under the Special Discharge Review Program (SDRP) which voted to upgrade his undesirable discharge to a general discharge based on his previously-issued honorable discharge. Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 3-7b, states a...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2001 | 2001060104C070421
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. On 9 September 1974, he...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100019762
IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 22 February 2011 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20100019762 THE BOARD CONSIDERED THE FOLLOWING EVIDENCE: 1. On an unknown date, the applicant's chain of command recommended the applicant be discharged by reason of unfitness under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-212 (Personnel Separations - Discharge - Unfitness and Unsuitability), then in effect. On 10 March 1976, the applicant was discharged with an undesirable discharge under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-206...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2004 | 2004100459C070208
The Board considered the following evidence: Exhibit A - Application for correction of military records. On 23 April 1969, the applicant's company commander initiated a request for discharge for unfitness under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-212 (Personnel Separations). However, his records show that he was convicted three times by special courts-martial and received three Article 15's during his military service.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2003 | 2003083527C070212
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. APPLICANT STATES : That his overall combat service was not given consideration at the time of his discharge. There is no evidence in the available records to show that he ever applied to the Army Discharge Review Board for an upgrade of his discharge within that board’s 15-year statute of limitations.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2013 | 20130016490
He completed 4 months and 16 days of creditable service that was characterized as under conditions other than honorable. When authorized, it was issued to a Soldier whose military record was satisfactory but not sufficiently meritorious to warrant an honorable discharge. On 20 January 1969, a special court-martial convicted him of being AWOL from 1 July 1967 to 15 March 1968, the day he was apprehended by civil authorities.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | 20110011501
The applicant requests, in effect, that his General Discharge (GD), under the provisions of the Department of Defense (DOD) Special Discharge Review Program (SDRP), be affirmed. Army Regulation 635-200 (Active Duty Enlisted Administrative Separations), paragraph 3-7b, provides that a general discharge is a separation from the Army under honorable conditions. The evidence shows that the applicant had behavioral problems but no mental disorder.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2005 | 20050004281C070206
The applicant provided new evidence which will be considered by the Board. The Board did not make that statement; the Record of Proceedings only recorded what the 30 December 1968 disapproval of his request for hardship discharge had stated. The [AWOL] incidents that occurred during the applicant's time in the Army were the only issues relevant to the ABCMR's consideration of his request for an upgraded discharge as the Board had no authority to determine he was not qualified for induction.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2001 | 2001060046C070421
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: On 28 December 1967, the applicant’s commander submitted a recommendation to separate the applicant from the service under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-212 for unsuitability.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100016752
He also states he did not receive his final pay at the time of his discharge and he was told his discharge would be upgraded in 6 months. At the time of his discharge he acknowledged with his signature that he had been informed of the procedures for applying to the Army Discharge Review Board for an upgrade of his discharge within that board's 15-year statute of limitations. There is no evidence in the available records regarding his pay from 15 March 1969 to 20 June 1969 when he was discharged.