| Mr. Carl W. S. Chun | Director | |
| Mr. William Blakely | Analyst |
| Ms. JoAnn H. Langston | Chairperson | |
| Mr. Walter T. Morrison | Member | |
| Mr. Roger W. Able | Member |
APPLICANT REQUESTS: In effect, that his undesirable discharge (UD) be upgraded.
APPLICANT STATES: In effect, that he suffered a back injury during basic combat training (BCT) and is now totally disabled. He states that he was informed that his discharge would be automatically upgraded to fully honorable within six months.
EVIDENCE OF RECORD: The applicant's military records show:
On 26 August 1968, the applicant was inducted into the Army of the United States 2 years. He successfully completed training and was awarded military occupational specialty (MOS) 11B (Light Weapons Infantryman).
The applicant’s record confirms that highest rank he attained while on active duty was private/E-2 and it documents no acts of valor, significant achievement, or service warranting special recognition. However, the record does reveal an extensive disciplinary history. This includes his conviction of being absent without leave (AWOL) from 4 January to 10 April 1969 by a special court-martial on 28 March 1969. In addition, his record shows he was AWOL on the following three separate occasions: 1 September to 29 October 1969; 24 November 1969 to 23 February 1970; and 14 March to 15 March 1970.
The applicant’s discharge packet containing the specific facts and circumstances surrounding his discharge processing is not in the record. However, there is a properly constituted separation document (DD Form 214) on file. This document contains the authority and reason for discharge and was authenticated by the applicant with his signature on the date of his separation. The DD Form 214 confirms that he was separated with a UD on 3 April 1970, under the provisions of chapter 10, Army Regulation 635-200, for the good of the service/in lieu of trial by court-martial. At the time of his separation, he had completed only 10 months and 28 days of credible active military service and he had accrued 248 days of time lost due to AWOL.
There is no evidence that the applicant applied to the Army Discharge Review Board for upgrade of his discharge within its 15-year statue 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 submit a request for discharge for the good of the service in lieu of trial by court-martial. The request may be submitted at any time after court-martial charges have been preferred and must include the individual’s admission of guilt. At the time of the applicant’s separation, the regulation provided for the issuance of an UD.
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 the contentions of the applicant that he is now disabled due to a back injury that occurred in BCT and that he was told his discharge would be upgraded in 6 months. However, it finds insufficient evidence to support these claims.
2. The applicant’s record is void of facts and circumstances concerning events that led to a discharge from the Army. The Board notes that his record contains a properly constituted DD Form 214, which he authenticated with his signature on the date of his separation, and the Board presumes government regularity in the discharge process.
3. The DD Form 214 confirms that the applicant was discharged in lieu of trial by court-martial. Procedurally, this would have required him to consult with legal counsel after being charged with the commission of an offense(s) punishable under the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) with a punitive discharge. In addition, after receiving legal counsel, he would have had to voluntarily request separation after admitting guilt to the stipulated offense(s) under the UCMJ.
4. In the absence of information to the contrary, the Board is satisfied that all requirements of law and regulation were met and the rights of the applicant were fully protected throughout the separation process and that the applicant’s discharge accurately reflects his overall record of service.
5. The Army does not have, nor has it ever had, a policy to automatically upgrade discharges. Each case is decided on its own merits when an applicant requests a change in discharge. An upgrade of a soldier’s discharge may be warranted if the Board determines that the discharge was in error or unjust. The Board found no evidence in the file that would satisfy this requirement.
6. 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.
7. 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
__JHL__ __WTM__ __RWA___ DENY APPLICATION
| CASE ID | AR200106330 |
| SUFFIX | |
| RECON | YYYYMMDD |
| DATE BOARDED | 2002/03/14 |
| TYPE OF DISCHARGE | (UD) |
| DATE OF DISCHARGE | 19700403 |
| DISCHARGE AUTHORITY | AR635-200, Chapter 10 . . . . . |
| DISCHARGE REASON | For the Good of the Service |
| BOARD DECISION | (DENY) |
| REVIEW AUTHORITY | |
| ISSUES 1. | 70.00 |
| 2. | |
| 3. | |
| 4. | |
| 5. | |
| 6. |
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002082964C070215
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 an honorable discharge. On 28 September 1977, the Army Discharge Review Board denied the applicant’s request for an upgrade of his discharge.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2003 | 2003084845C070212
The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein. There is no indication in the available records that the applicant suffered from any psychological disorders at the time of discharge. The applicant's voluntary request for separation under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-208, chapter 10, for the good of the service, to avoid trial by court-martial, was administratively correct and in conformance with applicable...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2003 | 2003088098C070403
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. 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...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2003 | 2003091341C070212
The applicant requests that his undesirable discharge be upgraded to a general discharge. The application submitted in this case is dated 20 May 2003. There is no evidence in the available records which show that the applicant 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 | CY2002 | 2002069827C070402
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, applicable law and regulations, it is concluded:
ARMY | BCMR | CY2004 | 20040009518C070208
There is no indication the applicant petitioned the Army Discharge Review Board (ADRB) seeking a discharge upgrade with that board's 15-year statute of limitations. 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. ...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2003 | 2003087897C070212
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: 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...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2005 | 20050001213C070206
On 22 July 1970, the applicant was discharged accordingly. However, the record shows the applicants mother was a widow at the time he voluntarily enlisted in the Army. 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.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2005 | 20050001213C070206
Leonard G. Hassell | |Member | The Board considered the following evidence: Exhibit A - Application for correction of military records. On 13 July 1970, the separation authority approved the applicant’s request for discharge and directed that he receive an UD, and that he be reduced to the lowest enlisted grade. On 22 July 1970, the applicant was discharged accordingly.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002081200C070215
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: EVIDENCE OF RECORD : The applicant's military records show: