| Mr. Carl W. S. Chun | Director | |
| Me. Lee Cates | Analyst |
| Mr. Arthur A. Omartian | Chairperson | |
| Mr. Hubert O. Fry, Jr. | Member | |
| Mr. Thomas E. O'Shaugnessy, Jr. | Member |
APPLICANT REQUESTS: That his undesirable discharge (UD) be upgraded to general under honorable conditions or honorable.
APPLICANT STATES: That he was young and foolish, but nothing in his conduct would warrant such a discharge. He indicates that he did not receive a General Court Martial for this discharge. Further, he indicates that his conduct was foolish, but not criminal. He did not run to Canada, but showed up and went to Vietnam. He was never a danger to anyone. He was unaware that a discharge was possible until a friend, a Purple Heart recipient and disabled vet, recommended that he apply to this Board.
EVIDENCE OF RECORD: The applicant's available military records show:
On 6 January 1969, at the age of 17 years, 9 months and 5 days, he enlisted in the Army. He completed his required training and was awarded military occupational specialty 91A (Medical Specialist). He was advanced to pay grade E-3, effective 27 March 1969.
During the period 29 July 1969 to15 April 1970, he was assigned to a unit in Vietnam.
On 2 October 1969, he received nonjudicial punishment (NJP) under Article 15, Uniform Code of Military Justice for his failure to go to his place of duty. His punishment was a forfeiture of $25.
On 25 November 1969, he received NJP for being absent without leave (AWOL) for 2 days. His punishment included a reduction to pay grade E-2, a forfeiture of $45 and extra duty for 30 days.
On 28 November 1969,medical records show he was admitted to a medical facility for acute cellulites, both arms, secondary to admitted self injection of a solution of red tabs (downers). He was treated and released to his detachment commander.
On 21 February 1970, he received NJP for his failure to sign into his unit and for disobeying a lawful command from his commander. His punishment is not shown in the available records.
On 4 March 1970, he received NJP for his failure to report for duty and being AWOL. His punishment is not shown in the available records.
On 12 March 1970, he received NJP for his failure to report for duty and being disrespectful to a noncommissioned officer. His punishment is not shown in the available records.
On 13 March 1970, he received NJP for being AWOL from his place of duty. His punishment is not shown in the available records.
On 16 March 1970, the unit commander requested the applicant be barred from reenlistment in the service. He cited 6 NJP’s and formal counseling on numerous occasions. Documentation shows the applicant was being processed for elimination under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-212.
On 13 April 1970, a DA Form 137(Installation Clearance Record) shows that the authority for his departure and separation was Army Regulation 635-212.
On 17 April 1970, he was discharged with a UD under the above cited regulation. His DD Form 214 indicates that he had 1 year, 3 months and 8 days of creditable service.
On 5 April 1973, the Florida Parole and Probation Commission, in an attempt to obtain records of the applicant, advised the National Personnel Records Center that the applicant had pled guilty, on 22 March 1973, to possession of Cannabis.
Army Regulation 635-212, then in effect, set forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel from active duty. That regulation provided, in pertinent part, that members involved in frequent incidents of a discreditable nature with military authorities were subject to separation for unfitness. 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 service did not then meet and does not now meet the standards of honorable service as defined in Army Regulation 635-200. Therefore, the characterization of the applicant’s current discharge is appropriate considering all the facts of the case. There also is no apparent error, injustice, inequity, or change in policy or standards on which to base recharacterization of his discharge to honorable or general, under honorable conditions.
2. The Board has noted the applicant’s contention of being young and foolish. Although the applicant entered active duty prior to his 18th birthday, he was well over that age when his misconduct began.
3. The evidence shows the applicant’s post service has been less than stellar.
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
_aao____ _hof___ __teo___ DENY APPLICATION
| CASE ID | AR2002067180 |
| SUFFIX | |
| RECON | |
| DATE BOARDED | 20020430 |
| TYPE OF DISCHARGE | |
| DATE OF DISCHARGE | |
| DISCHARGE AUTHORITY | |
| DISCHARGE REASON | |
| BOARD DECISION | DENY |
| REVIEW AUTHORITY | |
| ISSUES 1. | 144 |
| 2. | |
| 3. | |
| 4. | |
| 5. | |
| 6. |
ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100029065
On 7 March 1970, NJP was imposed against him for being absent without leave (AWOL) from 28 February to 2 March 1970 and from 3 to 5 March 1970. On 7 March 1970, the applicant's commander also notified the applicant that he was initiating action to discharge him from the service under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-212 (Personnel Separations Discharge Unfitness and Unsuitability) for unfitness. Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 3-7b, provides that a general discharge is a...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002078041C070215
The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein. On 6 November 1970, the applicant was separated 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 IDAR2002078041SUFFIXRECONDATE BOARDED20030617TYPE OF DISCHARGE(UD)DATE OF DISCHARGE19701106DISCHARGE AUTHORITYAR635-212DISCHARGE REASONA51.00BOARD...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2003 | 2003086066C070212
The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein. APPLICANT STATES : In effect, that his discharge should be upgraded because he was accepted under lowered enlistment standards and he was diagnosed with an immature personality, passive aggressive type – chronic. After hearing testimony and reviewing the evidence of record, the ADRB again determined that the applicant was properly discharged and that there was...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002072150C070403
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: 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 | CY2004 | 2004105372C070208
THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE: 1. On 17 August 1971, the applicant was notified that a board of officers would convene to determine whether he should be discharged from the Army under the provisions of Army Regulations 635-212 prior to his expiration of service. On 4 January 1987, the Army Discharge Review Board denied the applicant’s request for an upgrade of his discharge.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002072164C070403
APPLICANT STATES : That he was informed at his court-martial that his discharge would be upgraded after a certain number of years and it has not been done. On 21 August 1969, NJP was imposed against him for failure to obey a lawful order from the battalion commander and for failure to go to his place of duty. 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...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002076702C070215
He also claims that the recurrent memories from the war were more than he could handle, and he was on strong pain medication for frequent headaches. On 5 October 1973, the Army Discharge Review Board (ADRB) reviewed the applicant’s case and after determining that his discharge was proper and equitable, it denied the applicant’s request for an upgrade to his discharge. DISCUSSION : Considering all the evidence, allegations, and information presented by the applicant, together with the...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2004 | 2004099951C070208
The applicant applied to the Army Discharge Review Board for an upgrade of his discharge in 2003, which was past that board's 15-year statute of limitations. The Board determined that the evidence presented does not demonstrate the existence of a probable error or injustice. Shirley L. Powell ______________________ CHAIRPERSON INDEX |CASE ID |AR2004099951 | |SUFFIX | | |RECON | | |DATE BOARDED |20040817 | |TYPE OF DISCHARGE |(UD) | |DATE OF DISCHARGE |19700610 | |DISCHARGE AUTHORITY...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2005 | 20050002653C070206
THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE: 1. This provision of law allows the Army Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR) to excuse failure to file within the 3-year statute of limitations if the ABCMR determines that it would be in the interest of justice to do so. 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...
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...