| Mr. Carl W. S. Chun | Director | |
| Ms. Antoinette Farley | Analyst |
| Mr. Fred N. Eichorn | Chairperson | |
| Mr. Walter T. Morrison | Member | |
| Mr. Christopher J. Prosser | Member |
APPLICANT REQUESTS: That his “undesirable discharge” be upgraded to honorable. He also wants the reason for his discharge changed from for the good of the service to “Convenience of the government”.
APPLICANT STATES: In effect, that he believes his ability to serve was impaired because of family problems. He found out from friends/relatives that his mother was having extreme family problems. She had not wanted him to know because his mother knew he would be worried about his family. He admits to leaving his duty station, because he felt it was his duty to see about the welfare of his mother and two sisters ages 9 and 14 years old. He points out that his mother had a mental breakdown from his stepfather’s physical abuse. Legal action was required to get his stepfather out of his mother’s home. He claims the mental stress he shouldered became more than he could bear. He also claims that the Fort Leonard Wood officials assured him that he could get the discharge upgraded at any time. He believes that his discharge should be upgraded to honorable and if the Board disagrees to provided him with a detailed explanation. He fails to provide a date of discovery but believes the Board should consider the case because states that his youth and immaturity then is, outweighed by the mature and rational judgments he can make today.
EVIDENCE OF RECORD: The applicant's military records are limited in that they do not contain several separation processing documents. However, his records shows that he enlisted on 31 October 1972 at the age of 18 for 3 years of active duty. He completed basic training, advanced individual training and was awarded military occupational specialty of 13A10 (Field Artillery Crewman) at Fort Carson, Colorado. On 31 February 1973 he was advanced to pay grade
E-2.
On 7 September 1973 the applicant was absent without leave (AWOL) for 3 days and accepted nonjudicial punishment (NJP) under Article 15, Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ).
His DA Form 20 shows that he was returned to duty as an Motor Carrier Driver at Fort Carson. On 4 February 1974, he was listed as being absent without leave (AWOL) and was dropped from the rolls of the Army on 5 March 1974. He was returned to military control at Fort Leonard Wood, Missouri on 5 May 1974.
On 28 May 1974 a physical examination found the applicant qualified for separation with a physical profile of 111111.
On 13 June 1974, Department of Army, Headquarters, US Army Training Center Engineer and Fort Leonard Wood, Missouri issued Special Orders Number
164 to effectively separate the applicant under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 10 under conditions other than honorable. He was issued a DD Form 258A (Undesirable Discharge Certificate).
The specific facts and circumstances surrounding the applicant’s separation are not on file. On 14 June 1974, the applicant was separated with a undesirable discharge under the provisions of chapter 10, Army Regulation 635-200, for the good of the service. His DD Form 214 shows that he had 1 year, 3 months and
3 days of creditable service and 131 days of lost time due to AWOL. The highest pay grade he attained was E-2.
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.
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. 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 is commensurate with his overall record.
2. The contention that he was young and immature is noted; however he demonstrated a capacity for honorable service by completion of basic and advanced individual training and completion of approximately 11 months of offense free service.
3. There is no evidence to either substantiate the seriousness of the applicant’s family problems or to demonstrate how his AWOL alleviated the situation.
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
___FNE _ ___WTM __CJP __ DENY APPLICATION
| CASE ID | AR2001062808 |
| SUFFIX | |
| RECON | |
| DATE BOARDED | 2002.05.02 |
| TYPE OF DISCHARGE | UD |
| DATE OF DISCHARGE | 19740614 |
| DISCHARGE AUTHORITY | AR635-200, Ch 10 . . . . . |
| DISCHARGE REASON | |
| BOARD DECISION | DENY |
| REVIEW AUTHORITY | |
| ISSUES 1. | A110.02 |
| 2. | A94.07 |
| 3. | |
| 4. | |
| 5. | |
| 6. |
ARMY | BCMR | CY2006 | 20060015602
The applicant requests that his undesirable discharge be upgraded to an honorable discharge. The applicant's military records show that he entered active duty on 23 September 1969. Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 3-7b, provides that a general discharge is a separation from the Army under honorable conditions.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100000066
THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE: 1. On 8 January 1975, the applicant's unit commander recommended approval of the applicant's request for discharge with the issuance of a UD Certificate. On 8 January 1975, the applicant's battalion commander recommended approval of the applicant's request for discharge with the issuance of a UD Certificate.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090000977
On 16 May 1975, the applicant requested a discharge under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations - Enlisted Personnel), chapter 10 (Discharge for the Good of the Service). The documents show the applicant stated, "I went AWOL because of marital problems I had after I joined the service. The evidence of record also shows that the applicant was 19 years of age when he submitted his request for discharge for the good of the service.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2007 | 20070018612
Director Analyst The following members, a quorum, were present: M Chairperson M Member M Member The Board considered the following evidence: Exhibit A - Application for correction of military records. THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE: 1. The applicant requests that his Undesirable Discharge (UD) be upgraded.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2003 | 2003088571C070403
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 | CY2003 | 2003084965C070212
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 a general discharge. He states his request was denied and he was told to request leave after arriving in Germany.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002067842C070402
The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein. He had served 1 year, 8 months and 28 days of total active service and had 97 days of lost time due to AWOL and confinement. 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...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002080638C070215
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. EVIDENCE OF RECORD : The applicant's military records show: The applicant petitioned the Army Discharge Review Board (ADRB) seeking a discharge upgrade.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2006 | 20060000812C070205
The applicant's military service records show that he enlisted in the U.S. Army on 30 December 1971. The applicant's military service records contain a DA Form 20 (Enlisted Qualification Record). The applicant's DD Form 214, with an effective date of 20 February 1974, shows that he was discharged under the provisions of chapter 10 of Army Regulation 635-200 for the good of the service in lieu of trial by court-martial and that his character of service was under other than honorable conditions.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2007 | 20070000297
There is no evidence in the available records which shows that he completed basic combat or advanced individual training. The DD Form 214 (Armed Forces of the United States Report of Transfer or Discharge) the applicant was issued at the time of his discharge confirms he was discharged and his characterization of service was under other than honorable conditions. The applicant contends that his discharge should be upgraded because he went home on leave to see his family after completing...