| Mr. Carl W. S. Chun | Director | |
| Ms. Deyon D. Battle | Analyst |
| Mr. Samuel A. Crumpler | Chairperson | |
| Mr. Kenneth W. Lapin | Member | |
| Mr. John T. Meixell | Member |
APPLICANT REQUESTS: That his undesirable discharge be upgraded to an honorable discharge.
APPLICANT STATES: That he went absent without leave (AWOL) because of problems that he was experiencing at home.
EVIDENCE OF RECORD: The applicant's military records show:
On 3 June 1970, he enlisted in the Army at Fort Polk, Louisiana, for 3 years in the pay grade of E-1. He successfully completed his training as a field artilleryman. On 9 October 1970, he was transferred to Germany.
The applicant went AWOL on 1 June 1971 and he remained absent until 19 April 1972.
On 28 April 1972, the applicant was notified that charges were pending against him for being AWOL. After consulting with counsel, he waived his rights and submitted a request for discharge under the provisions of Army Regulation
635-200, chapter 10, for the good of the service, in lieu to trial by court-martial. Along with his request for discharge, he submitted a statement in his own behalf in which he stated that he went AWOL because he shared a room with three other soldiers and the soldiers were not doing their share to help keep the room clean. He also stated that he attempted to change jobs and all of his attempts were disapproved. He concluded by stating that he was harassed whenever he applied for leave.
The appropriate authority approved the request for discharge on 5 May 1972. Accordingly, on 12 May 1972, the applicant was discharged under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 10, for the good of the service, in lieu of trial by court-martial. He had completed 1 year and 22 days of total active service and he had 323 days of lost time due to AWOL. He was furnished an Undesirable Discharge Certificate.
A review of the available records fails to show that the applicant was experiencing problems at home when he went AWOL.
There is no evidence of record that shows that the applicant ever applied to the Army Discharge Review Board (ADRB) for an upgrade of his discharge within that board’s 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. The applicant's administrative separation was accomplished in compliance with applicable regulations with no indication of procedural errors, which would tend to jeopardize his rights.
2. The type of discharge directed and the reasons therefore were appropriate considering all the facts of the case.
3. There is no evidence of record to support the applicant’s contention that he was experiencing problems at home at the time that he went AWOL. In the statement that he submitted when he requested discharge, he stated that he went AWOL because of the three other soldiers that he shared his room with, because he continued to be disapproved when he attempted to change jobs and that he was harassed when he applied for leave. There is no evidence to support those contentions as well.
4. The applicant has submitted neither probative evidence nor a convincing argument in support of the request.
5. 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.
6. 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
___sac__ __jm ____ ___kwl __ DENY APPLICATION
| CASE ID | AR2002067024 |
| SUFFIX | |
| RECON | YYYYMMDD |
| DATE BOARDED | 2002/05/07 |
| TYPE OF DISCHARGE | UD |
| DATE OF DISCHARGE | 1972/05/72 |
| DISCHARGE AUTHORITY | AR 635-200 |
| DISCHARGE REASON | 689 |
| BOARD DECISION | DENY |
| REVIEW AUTHORITY | |
| ISSUES 1. 708 | 144.7100 |
| 2. | |
| 3. | |
| 4. | |
| 5. | |
| 6. |
ARMY | BCMR | CY2003 | 2003090248C070212
On 16 November 1972, while he was still in confinement, the applicant submitted a request for discharge under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 10, for the good of the service, in lieu of trial by court-martial. He went on to state that he tried to be discharged once before and that his request for discharge was denied. There is no evidence of record that shows that the applicant ever applied to the Army Discharge Review Board for an upgrade of his discharge within that...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080010631
The applicant provides two psychiatric medical statements, one dated 29 October 1975 and one dated 24 May 2007. Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel. The applicant provided a number of reasons, in his statement with his request for discharge and in his statement to the ADRB, as to why a model Soldier might consider going AWOL for an extended period of time after serving as an operating room specialist during his Stateside...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002083076C070215
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 honorable. 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 that they have been briefed and understand the...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2006 | 20060001197C070205
The applicant requests, in effect, that his undesirable discharge be upgraded to an honorable discharge by reason of physical disability. The physician noted that the applicant attempted to convince the medics that he should be discharged because of his back problems. There is no evidence in the available records to show that he 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 | 2002072412C070403
APPLICANT REQUESTS: That his undesirable discharge be upgraded to a general or medical discharge. He contended at that time that he simply could not adjust to military life, that he had been a good citizen since his discharge and that he did not want to lose his job or his new home because his employer discovered the type of discharge he received. The ADRB determined that he had been properly discharged and denied his request on 24 July 1974.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2003 | 2003087490C070212
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 or a general discharge. APPLICANT STATES : That he went absent without leave (AWOL) for pertinent reasons.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080018255
IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 17 MARCH 2009 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20080018255 THE BOARD CONSIDERED THE FOLLOWING EVIDENCE: 1. The applicant contends that his request to have his undesirable discharge upgraded should be reconsidered. ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20080018255 3 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 1 ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20080018255 5 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 1
ARMY | BCMR | CY2013 | 20130009848
On 15 March 1972, the separation authority approved the discharge action and ordered the applicant reduced to the lowest enlisted grade and discharged under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 10, with an undesirable discharge. Accordingly, the applicant was discharged on 16 March 1972. The applicant's request for an upgrade of his undesirable discharge was carefully considered; however, there is insufficient evidence to support his request.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140018476
These are the reasons he could not perform his military duties. On 15 September 1972, he requested discharge under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations - Enlisted Personnel), chapter 10, for the good of the service - in lieu of trial by court-martial. The DD Form 214 (Armed Forces of the United States Report of Transfer or Discharge) he was issued shows he was discharged under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 10, for the good of the service in...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140010708
The applicant requests that his undesirable discharge be upgraded to an honorable discharge by reason of permanent disability (medical discharge). There is no indication in the available records to show that he applied to the Army Discharge Review Board for an upgrade of his discharge within that boards 15-year statute of limitations. When authorized, it is issued to a Soldier whose military record is satisfactory but not sufficiently meritorious to warrant an honorable discharge.