| Mr. Carl W. S. Chun | Director | |
| Ms. Rosa M. Chandler | Analyst |
| Mr. Arthur A. Omartian | Chairperson | |
| Mr. Roger W. Able | Member | |
| Ms. Karen Y. Fletcher | Member |
APPLICANT REQUESTS: That his undesirable discharge (UD) be upgraded to a fully honorable discharge (HD).
APPLICANT STATES: The applicant makes no contentions.
EVIDENCE OF RECORD: The applicant's military records show:
That prior to the period of service under review, he served honorably in the Regular Army (RA) from 30 June 1967-29 March 1968. He served in military occupational specialty (MOS) 64A (Light Vehicle Driver).
On 30 March 1968, while assigned to Germany, the applicant reenlisted in the RA for a period of 4 years, for training in MOS 64B (Heavy Vehicle Driver) and in pay grade E-3. On 23 December 1968, the applicant was assigned to the Republic of Vietnam (RVN).
On 25 September 1969, nonjudicial punishment (NJP) was imposed against the applicant under the provisions of Article 15, Uniform Code of Military Justice for disobeying a lawful order of a commissioned officer and for being intoxicated to the point of incapacitation so that he could not perform his duties on 23 September 1969. His punishment included forfeiture of $65.00 pay for 1 month and 7 days’ extra duty.
On 22 December 1969, the applicant was reassigned from the RVN and he returned to the United States. On 22 January 1970, he was assigned to Fort Carson, Colorado.
The applicant's records do not contain all of the facts and circumstances surrounding the discharge process. However, evidence that is available indicates that on 1 September 1970, civilian authorities in Colorado Springs, Colorado, apprehended the applicant and charged him with assault with the intent to commit murder. In January 1971, he was convicted of assault with a deadly weapon and sentenced to an indefinite term at the Colorado Reformatory, Buena Vista, Colorado.
The applicant's record also contains a properly constituted DD Form 214 (Armed Forces of the United States Report of Transfer or Discharge) that was prepared at the time of separation. The applicant’s DD Form 214 shows that on 16 August 1971, he was discharged in absentia, under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-206, for conviction by a civil court. He was given a UD. He had completed 2 years, 5 months and 2 days of active military service on the enlistment under review and he had completed 9 months on a previous period of enlistment. He also had 350 days lost time due to being in civilian confinement.
An undated letter from the Department of the Army, Headquarters, 5th Infantry Division (Mechanized), Fort Carson shows that, on an unknown date, the applicant's "UD Certificate, his DD Form 258A and his DD Form 214" were forwarded to him at the Colorado Reformatory.
There is no evidence that the applicant ever applied to the Army Discharge Review Board for review of his discharge.
Army Regulation 635-206, then in effect, stated, in pertinent part, that an individual will be considered for discharge when an individual is initially convicted by civil authorities of an offense which involves moral turpitude, regardless of the sentence received or maximum punishment permissible under any code. At the time a UD was 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. 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.
2. There is no indication of procedural errors that would have jeopardized the applicant's rights. Conviction by civil authorities obligated military authorities to consider the applicant for discharge. Retention is normally only considered in exceptionally meritorious cases when clearly in the best interests of the Army.
3. The type of discharge directed and the reason for discharge was appropriate considering the facts of the case.
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
_AAO___ __RWA__ ___KYF _ DENY APPLICATION
| CASE ID | AR |
| SUFFIX | |
| RECON | |
| DATE BOARDED | 20020404 |
| TYPE OF DISCHARGE | (HD, GD, UOTHC, UD, BCD, DD, UNCHAR) |
| DATE OF DISCHARGE | YYYYMMDD |
| DISCHARGE AUTHORITY | AR . . . . . |
| DISCHARGE REASON | |
| BOARD DECISION | (NC, GRANT , DENY, GRANT PLUS) |
| REVIEW AUTHORITY | |
| ISSUES 1. | |
| 2. | |
| 3. | |
| 4. | |
| 5. | |
| 6. |
ARMY | BCMR | CY2006 | 20060011201
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 13 March 2007 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20060011201 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. Records show the applicant was arrested on 11 June 1969 by civilian authorities. On 2 March 1976, the separation authority approved the applicants request for discharge and directed that he be furnished an undesirable...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2004 | 20040008684C070208
He had completed 1 year, 8 months and 10 days of active military service. At the time, a UD was considered appropriate. The applicant was convicted of possession of a narcotic drug and sentenced to serve an indeterminate term not to exceed 5 years in civil confinement.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2012 | 20120006680
On 13 October 1971, he acknowledged that he had been advised by counsel of the contemplated action to separate him in accordance with Army Regulation 635-206 (Personnel Separations Discharge Misconduct (Fraudulent Entry, Conviction by Civil Court, and Absence without Leave or Desertion)) by reason of conviction by a civil court. There is no evidence he applied to the Army Discharge Review Board for an upgrade of his discharge within its 15-year statute of limitations. The evidence...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2013 | 20130018038
The applicant requests an upgrade of his undesirable discharge (UD) to an honorable discharge. On 10 December 1968, the applicant's company commander recommended the applicant be discharged under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-206 (Personnel Separations Discharge Misconduct). There is no evidence he applied to the Army Discharge Review Board within its 15-year statute of limitations for an upgrade of his discharge.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080012117
Item 22 (Appointments and Reductions) shows that he was promoted to the rank of specialist four (SP4) on 7 January 1969, and that this was the highest rank he held while serving on active duty. On 16 April 1971, the applicant was discharged accordingly. The separation document (DD Form 214) issued to the applicant upon his discharge shows he was separated under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-206, and that he was issued an UD discharge.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2012 | 20120006649
Application for correction of military records (with supporting documents provided, if any). Army Regulation 635-206, in effect at the time, provided the authority for the administrative separation or retention of enlisted personnel who had committed an act and or acts of misconduct. Army Regulation 635-200 (Active Duty Enlisted Administrative Separations) provides the current Army policy for enlisted separations.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140007960
IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 9 December 2014 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20140007960 THE BOARD CONSIDERED THE FOLLOWING EVIDENCE: 1. On 24 June 1971, he was notified that he was being considered for elimination from the Army under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-206 (Personnel Separations Discharge Misconduct) because of his conviction by a civil court and that he could be issued a UD Certificate. _______ _ x_______ ___ CHAIRPERSON I certify that herein is recorded the true and complete...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2006 | 20060013754C071029
On 31 July 1978, the Army Discharge Review Board (ADRB) denied the applicant's petition to upgrade his discharge. The U.S. Court of Appeals, observing that applicants to the Army Discharge Review Board (ADRB) are by statute allowed 15 years to apply there, and that this Board's exhaustion requirement (Army Regulation 15-185, paragraph 2-8), effectively shortens that filing period, has determined that the 3-year limit on filing to the Army Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR)...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2006 | 20060014928
The punishment included a reduction to sergeant, pay grade E5, forfeiture of $100.00 pay per month for 2 months (suspended), and 14 days extra duty. He stated that upon his arrival to Fort Carson he received $220.00 in July 1972; no pay in August or September 1972; $9.00 in October; and about $25.00 in the months of November and December 1972. On 31 October 1973, the board of officers recommended that the applicant be discharged from the service and issued an Undesirable Discharge Certificate.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080007850
The applicant requests, in effect, reconsideration of his request for correction of his military service records to show award of the Combat Infantryman Badge. The SF 189 shows, in pertinent part, that the applicant requested his total service record book including medical. The NA Form 13045 shows that the applicant was informed the medical records he requested were lent to the Veterans Administration and referred the applicant to the VA claim number. The evidence of record shows that...