| Mr. Carl W. S. Chun | Director | |
| Mr. Vic Whitney | Analyst |
| Mr. John N. Slone |
Chairperson | |
| Mr. John E. Denning |
Member | |
| Ms. Barbara J. Ellis |
Member |
APPLICANT REQUESTS: That his discharge under other than honorable conditions be upgraded to a general discharge.
APPLICANT STATES: That he was absent without leave (AWOL) on two occasions for 3 days to be with his dying mother. He had requested leave but it was denied. The type of discharge he received was excessive under the circumstances. He would not have gone AWOL if his mother had not been seriously ill.
EVIDENCE OF RECORD: The applicant's military records show:
He enlisted and entered active duty on 20 May 1970, for training as a transportation specialist. On 20 July 1970, while still in training, he was punished under Article 15, Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ), for failure to go to his place of duty. On 24 September 1970, while still in training, he was punished under Article 15, UCMJ, for 9 days AWOL. On 19 November 1970, while still in training, he was punished under Article 15, UCMJ, for 3 days AWOL.
In January 1971, he was punished under Article 15, UCMJ, for 3 days AWOL. On 1 September 1971, he was punished under Article 15, UCMJ, for 42 days AWOL. On 7 January 1972, he was punished under Article 15, UCMJ, for failure to go to his place of duty. On 10 January 1972, he was punished under Article 15, UCMJ, for failure to go to his place of duty.
On 10 January 1972, the applicant’s commander recommended he be discharged for unfitness because of his repeated commission of petty offenses. The applicant was reported to frequently express his desire to get out of the Army.
On 13 January 1972, after consulting with counsel, the applicant waived his rights to consideration of his case by a board of officers and to submit statements in his own behalf. At a mental status evaluation the applicant's behavior was normal. He was fully alert and oriented and displayed a level mood. His thinking was clear, his thought content normal, and his memory good. There was no significant mental illness. The applicant was mentally responsible. He was able to distinguish right from wrong and to adhere to the right.
On 25 January 1972, the separation authority, a brigadier general, approved the recommendation for separation for unfitness and directed issuance of an Undesirable Discharge Certificate. Effective 1 February 1972, the applicant was discharged under authority of Army Regulation 635-212. He had 1 year, 7 months, and 16 days creditable service, and 54 days lost time.
Army Regulation 635-212, in effect at the time, set forth the basic authority for the elimination of enlisted personnel. Paragraph 6 of the regulation provided, in pertinent part, that an individual was subject to separation for unfitness because of frequent incidents of a discreditable nature with civil or military authorities. When separation for unfitness was warranted an undesirable discharge was 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 contention that his only offenses were AWOL on two occasions for 3 days is not supported by the evidence of record. The evidence shows that he was AWOL on four separate occasions for a recorded total of 54 days.
2. The discharge proceedings were conducted in accordance with law and regulations applicable at the time. The character of the discharge is commensurate with the applicant's overall record of military service. He was afforded the opportunity to submit statements in his own behalf, but he declined to do so.
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
__js___ __jd____ ___be_____ DENY APPLICATION
| CASE ID | AR2001062765 |
| SUFFIX | |
| RECON | |
| DATE BOARDED | 20020214 |
| TYPE OF DISCHARGE | UD |
| DATE OF DISCHARGE | 19720201 |
| DISCHARGE AUTHORITY | AR 635-212 |
| DISCHARGE REASON | A51.00 |
| BOARD DECISION | DENY |
| REVIEW AUTHORITY | |
| ISSUES 1. | 110.02 |
| 2. | |
| 3. | |
| 4. | |
| 5. | |
| 6. |
ARMY | BCMR | CY2003 | 2003090084C070212
The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein. It is issued to a soldier whose military record is satisfactory but not sufficiently meritorious to warrant an honorable 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 | CY2010 | 20100023992
He did not feel he could leave his mother by herself in her condition. A memorandum, dated 18 December 1970, that shows the Commanding General, U.S. Army Field Artillery Center and Fort Sill, Fort Sill, OK, approved his discharge under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-212 (Personnel Separations - Discharge - Unfitness and Unsuitability) by reason of unfitness with the issuance of an Undesirable Discharge Certificate; and b. His record contains a DD Form 214 that shows he was...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2005 | 20050006954C070206
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 10 January 2006 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20050006954 I certify that hereinafter is recorded the true and complete record of the proceedings of the Army Board for Correction of Military Records in the case of the above-named individual. He further states that his discharge was upgraded under the Department of Defense Special Discharge Review Program (DOD-SDRP) but was not affirmed. Evidence shows that the applicant was properly and...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090020436
His military records show he enlisted in the Regular Army in the rank/grade of private (PV1)/E-1 on 5 April 1968, for 3 years. Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations - Enlisted Personnel), then in effect, provided that an honorable discharge was a separation with honor. Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 3-7b, provided that a general discharge was a separation from the Army under honorable conditions.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080011637
Although all of the correspondence from his separation packet was not present in his military records, a letter, dated 11 July 1972, essentially shows that the applicant's commanding officer recommended that he be discharged under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-212 for unfitness. The applicant essentially stated that his multiple instances of NJP under Article 15 of the UCMJ did not warrant an undesirable discharge, and that his NJP was assigned to trivial issues. Although all of...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002072677C070403
The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein. At the time of the separation physical examination, competent medical authority determined that the applicant was then medically fit for retention or appropriate separation. The applicant’s claim that he now has PTSD because of his experiences in Vietnam is not supported by any evidence in his record, nor has the applicant submitted any evidence thereof.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002075469C070403
The Board considered the following evidence: On 31 July 1972, the applicant was discharged in pay grade E-1, under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-212, for unfitness with a UD. Carl W. S. Chun Director, Army Board for Correction of Military RecordsINDEXCASE IDAR2002075469SUFFIXRECONYYYYMMDDDATE BOARDED2002/09/10TYPE OF DISCHARGE(UD)DATE OF DISCHARGE1972/07/31DISCHARGE AUTHORITYAR635-212 .
ARMY | BCMR | CY2012 | 20120017268
On 5 March 1970, the applicant's immediate commander initiated separation action against him in accordance with Army Regulation 635-212 (Personnel Separations - Discharge - Unfitness and Unsuitability) by reason of unfitness. Consistent with the chain of command's recommendations, the separation authority approved the applicants discharge under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-212 by reason of unfitness and directed he be furnished an Undesirable Discharge Certificate and be reduced...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2001 | 2001054434C070420
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. Evidence of record also...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100012179
Army Regulation 635-200 (Active Duty Enlisted Administrative Separations), paragraph 3-7a, provides that an honorable discharge is a separation with honor and entitles the recipient to benefits provided by law. Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 3-7b, provides that a general discharge is a separation from the Army under honorable conditions. __________X________ CHAIRPERSON I certify that herein is recorded the true and complete record of the proceedings of the Army Board for Correction of...