| Mr. Carl W. S. Chun | Director | |
| Mrs .Judy Blanchard-Miller | Analyst |
| Ms. JoAnn H. Langston | Chairperson | ||
| Mr. Raymond V. O’Connor, Jr. | Member | ||
| Ms. Barbara J. Lutz | Member |
APPLICANT REQUESTS: In effect, that his undesirable discharge (UD) be upgraded.
APPLICANT STATES: In effect, that when he left Vietnam he was very sick with a nervous condition and was unable to think about the result of his action.
EVIDENCE OF RECORD: The applicant's military records show:
On 10 April 1967, the applicant enlisted in the Regular Army for 3 years. He completed the required training and was awarded military occupational specialty 63C10 (Service Vehicle Repairman). On 19 June 1969, the applicant was discharged after serving 2 years, 2 months and 10 days of honorable active service. On 20 June 1969, the applicant immediately reenlisted for 4 years. The highest grade he achieved was pay grade E-5.
On 21 November 1969, the applicant accepted nonjudicial punishment under Article 15, Uniform Code of Military Justice, for dereliction in the performance of duty. His imposed punishment was a forfeiture of $70.00 pay.
On 30 April 1970, the applicant was convicted by a special court-martial of being absent without leave (AWOL) from 27 February to 15 April 1970. He was sentenced to a forfeiture of $100.00 pay per month for 3 months and a reduction to pay grade E-4.
On 6 February 1973, court-martial charges were preferred against the applicant of two specifications of being AWOL from 14 May to 7 July 1970 and from
20 July 1970 to 5 February 1973.
On 14 February 1973, after consulting with legal counsel the applicant voluntarily without any coercion requested a discharge under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 10, for the good of the service in lieu of trial by court-martial. The applicant acknowledged, that he understood the elements of the offense charged. The applicant waived further rehabilitation and was advised of the effects of a discharge under other than honorable conditions. He acknowledged that he understood, that he might be deprived of many or all Army and Veterans Administration benefits. He was afforded the opportunity to submit statements in his behalf, but decline to do so.
On 21 February 1973, the company commander, recommended approval of the applicant’s request for discharge under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 10. The commander’s decision was based on the applicant’s numerous acts of misconduct.
On 22 March 1973, the appropriate authority approved the applicant’s request for discharge and directed the issuance of an Undesirable Discharge Certificate. On 23 April 1973, the applicant was discharged, in pay grade E-1, under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 10, for the good of the service with a UD. During this enlistment he completed 1 year and 6 days of creditable active military service with 1,033 days of lost time.
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 UD discharge is 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. 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. The applicant's voluntary request for separation under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 10, for the good of the service, to avoid trial by court-martial, was administratively correct and in conformance with applicable regulations. There is no indication that the request was made under coercion, duress or that his rights were violated in any way.
3. The contentions of the applicant have been noted by the Board. However, they are not supported by either evidence submitted with the application or the evidence of record. The discharge process was in accordance with applicable law and regulations and the applicant's service was appropriately characterized.
4. The applicant has submitted neither probative evidence nor a convincing argument in support of the request.
5. Therefore, in view of the foregoing, there is no basis for granting the applicant’s requests.
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 __ __ RVO _ __BJL __ DENY APPLICATION
| CASE ID | AR2002067565 |
| SUFFIX | |
| RECON | YYYYMMDD |
| DATE BOARDED | 2002/08/22 |
| TYPE OF DISCHARGE | UD |
| DATE OF DISCHARGE | 1973/04/23 |
| DISCHARGE AUTHORITY | AR635-200,chp10 . . . . . |
| DISCHARGE REASON | A70.00 |
| BOARD DECISION | (DENY) |
| REVIEW AUTHORITY | |
| ISSUES 1. 144.7000 | |
| 2. | |
| 3. | |
| 4. | |
| 5. | |
| 6. |
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 | CY2002 | 2002083239C070215
The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein. On 13 December 1968, the applicant enlisted in the Regular Army (RA) for 4 years, for assignment to Korea, a reenlistment bonus (amount unknown), his previous MOS and in pay grade E-4. The Board noted the applicant served in Vietnam prior to the period of service under review and he received an honorable discharge for that period of service.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2001 | 2001058344C070421
The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein. He was in military confinement from 3 February-29 March 1971. On 1 April 1971, the applicant was discharged under the provisions of chapter 10, Army Regulation 635-200 with a UD.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002076798C070215
On 24 February 1969, he went AWOL and he remained in an AWOL status until he returned to military control at Fort Hood on 6 March 1969. On 30 November 1972, the applicant's chain of command denied his request for separation for the good of the service and indicated that he should be tried by a court-martial authorized to direct a bad conduct discharge. On the same date, the applicant was separated under the provisions of chapter 10, Army Regulation 635-200 with a UD.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2006 | 20060012551
The Board considered the following evidence: Exhibit A - Application for correction of military records. The applicant requests that the lost time during the period of 5 February to 21 April 1970 be removed from his report of separation (DD Form 214). A condition of submitting such a request is that the individual concerned must indicate that they are submitting the request of their own free will, without coercion from anyone and that they have been briefed and understand the consequences...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2005 | 20050018207C070206
The applicant was discharged on 4 December 1970 under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 10 with a UD. 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 punitive discharge is authorized for...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2006 | 20060003622C070205
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 19 September 2006 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20060003622 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. The applicant requests that his undesirable discharge be upgraded to a general discharge. The U.S. Court of Appeals, observing that applicants to the Army Discharge Review Board (ADRB) are by statute allowed 15...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2007 | 20070017557
THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE: 1. The applicant requests that his undesirable discharge be changed to an honorable discharge. On 6 August 1973, the applicant was discharged from active duty under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 10 for the good of the service with an undesirable discharge.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2003 | 2003086526C070212
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. Accordingly, the applicant was discharged on 7 August 1973 under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 10, for the good of the service.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2013 | 20130021546
On 17 May 1971, he was convicted by a special court-martial of one specification each of being absent without leave (AWOL) during the following periods: * from on or about 26 October 1970 through on or about 29 November 1970 * from on or about 20 December 1970 through on or about 4 January 1971 * from on or about 13 January 1971 through on or about 17 March 1971 * from on or about 6 April 1971 through on or about 30 April 1971 He was sentenced to confinement at hard labor for seventy-five...