| Mr. Carl W. S. Chun | Director | |
| Mrs. Nancy Amos | Analyst |
| Mr. Raymond V. O’Connor, Jr. | Chairperson | |
| Mr. John P. Infante | Member | |
| Mr. William D. Powers | Member |
APPLICANT REQUESTS: Reconsideration of his request for an upgrade of his discharge to honorable.
APPLICANT STATES: That he does not believe he deserved an undesirable discharge. One day after duty hours he was purchasing beer for himself and several friends at the post exchange. The Officer of the Day happened by with a large dog. The Officer of the Day pulled him off the platform at the post exchange and began to yell at him. Without thinking, he back talked the Officer of the Day. Several months later he received a special court-martial and was sentenced to three months in the stockade. About a month after he was released he was given notice of a hearing to determine whether he should be discharged. His defense counsel was from an infantry company who did not know how to defend him, so he was given an undesirable discharge. He provides eight statements of support, including one from a buddy who was an eyewitness to the incident, as supporting evidence.
COUNSEL CONTENDS: Counsel makes no additional contention.
NEW EVIDENCE OR INFORMATION: Incorporated herein by reference are military records which were summarized in a memorandum prepared to reflect the Board's original consideration of his case on 25 January 2001 (docket number AR2000046950).
The applicant provides seven statements of support attesting to his post-service reputation for quality work, honesty, generosity, truthfulness, and high moral standards.
The eighth statement is from one of the friends for whom the applicant was buying beer the day of the incident described by the applicant. The friend basically confirms the applicant’s view of the incident.
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 notes that the applicant’s friend substantiates the applicant’s view of an incident which appears to have led to his court-martial. However, the Board still does not have the facts and circumstances that led to his administrative discharge. This incident and the related court-martial may have been only one of several incidents that occurred during his service. Without being able to review the discharge packet, the Board must presume that the type of discharge given and the reasons therefor were appropriate.
2. The Board is cognizant of the applicant’s good post-service conduct; however, this factor does not warrant granting the relief requested.
3. The overall merits of the case, including the latest submissions and arguments are insufficient as a basis for the Board to reverse its previous decision.
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
__rvo___ __jpi___ __wdp___ DENY APPLICATION
| CASE ID | AR2001062238 |
| SUFFIX | |
| RECON | |
| DATE BOARDED | 20011129 |
| TYPE OF DISCHARGE | UD |
| DATE OF DISCHARGE | 19560616 |
| DISCHARGE AUTHORITY | AR 635-208 |
| DISCHARGE REASON | A50.00 |
| BOARD DECISION | (DENY) |
| REVIEW AUTHORITY | |
| ISSUES 1. | 110.00 |
| 2. | |
| 3. | |
| 4. | |
| 5. | |
| 6. |
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002072525C070403
The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein. The Board considered the following evidence: When such separation was warranted, an undesirable discharge was considered appropriate.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2003 | 2003083489C070212
APPLICANT STATES : In effect, he would like the Board to consider his post service contributions to veterans and his community and grant him an upgrade based upon these post service contributions. EVIDENCE OF RECORD : The applicant's military records show: The discharge authority reviewed the recommendation and directed that the applicant be discharged under Army Regulation 635-200, for unfitness, with a general discharge.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002073000C070403
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. 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 | CY2002 | 2002075382C070403
The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein. On 16 January 1970, the applicant was discharged, with a discharge UOTHC, in pay grade E-1, under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-212 for unfitness. Army Regulation 635-212, in effect at the time, set forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002083186C070215
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: DISCUSSION : Considering all the evidence, allegations, and information presented by the applicant, together with the evidence of record, and applicable law and regulations, it is concluded:
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002081197C070215
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. In support of his application he submits a statement from a psychiatrist and a letter from his sister. EVIDENCE OF RECORD : The applicant's military records show:
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002067634C070402
The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein. On an unknown date, the appropriate authority approved the separation action and directed that the applicant be separated with a GD and not to be transferred to the Individual Ready Reserve. She had completed 2 years, 3 months, and 9 days of creditable military service and she had no recorded lost time.On 30 January 1997, the Army Discharge Review Board denied the...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2003 | 2003090176C070212
APPLICANT STATES : In effect, that he was given no help for his drinking problem while he was in the service. After considering the case, the board of officers recommended that the applicant be discharged for unfitness under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-208 and that he receive an UD. The separation authority accepted the recommendation of the board of officers and directed that the applicant be discharged accordingly.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2006 | 20060000936C070205
The available records indicate that the applicant was approved for a waiver of lost time on 31 March 1948, to enlist in the Army. Army Regulation 615-364, then in effect, set forth the conditions under which enlisted personnel could be discharged with a dishonorable or bad conduct discharge. Title 10, United Stated Code, section 1552, the authority under which this Board acts, provides, in pertinent part, that the Army Board for Correction of Military Records is not empowered to set aside...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002081630C070215
The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein. Subsequently, Article 72, UCMJ, proceedings were initiated to determine whether the suspension of the applicant’s sentence to a BCD should be vacated. No error was found.