| Mr. Carl W. S. Chun | Director | |
| Ms. Wanda L. Waller | Analyst |
| Ms. Celia L. Adolphi | Chairperson | |
| Ms. Barbara J. Ellis | Member | |
| Mr. Donald P. Hupman | Member |
APPLICANT REQUESTS: Reconsideration of his earlier appeal to correct his military records by upgrading his undesirable discharge to honorable.
APPLICANT STATES: In effect, that his discharge should be upgraded for the following reasons: (1) that he has been a good citizen since discharge; (2) that his record of convictions by civil authorities while he was in service indicates only minor or isolated offenses; (3) that his ability to serve was impaired by his youth and immaturity, low aptitude scores and level of education, his deprived background, marital and family problems, personal problems, financial problems, use of alcohol and certain other problems; and (4) that he tried to serve and wanted to, but just couldn’t or wasn’t able to.
NEW EVIDENCE OR INFORMATION: Incorporated herein by reference are military records which were summarized in the Memorandum of Consideration prepared to reflect the consideration of Docket Number AR1999018096 by the Army Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR) on 8 July 1999.
The applicant submits a Statement of Material Contentions which lists the reasons why his discharge should be upgraded to honorable.
The applicant submits a character reference letter from a pastor who describes the applicant as a happily married man, good father, reliable worker, and responsible individual.
The applicant submits a character reference letter from a former employer who describes the applicant as an excellent employee and trusted friend.
The Disabled American Veterans, as counsel for the applicant, was notified of the applicant’s pending review by the Board; however, no brief was submitted.
The applicant’s submissions were not previously considered by the ABCMR and are therefore considered new evidence which will be considered by the Board.
Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 3-7, provides that an honorable discharge is a separation with honor and entitles the recipient to benefits provided by law. The honorable characterization is appropriate when the quality of the member’s service generally has met the standards of acceptable conduct and performance of duty for Army personnel (emphasis added), or is otherwise so meritorious that any other characterization would be clearly inappropriate.
Army Regulation 15-185 sets forth the policy and procedures for the ABCMR. It provides that, if a request for reconsideration is received within one year of the prior consideration and the case has not been previously reconsidered, it will be resubmitted to the Board if there is evidence that was not in the record at the time of the Board’s prior consideration. This includes but is not limited to any facts or arguments as to why relief should be granted. The staff of the Board is authorized to determine whether or not such evidence has been submitted.
The regulation provides further guidance for reconsideration requests that are received more than one year after the Board’s original consideration or after the Board has already reconsidered the case. In such cases, the staff of the Board will review the request to determine if substantial relevant evidence has been submitted that shows fraud, mistake in law, mathematical miscalculation, manifest error, or if there exists substantial relevant new evidence discovered contemporaneously with or within a short time after the Board’s original decision. If the staff finds such evidence, the case will be resubmitted to the Board. If no such evidence is found, the application will be returned without action.
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 considered the applicant’s contention that he has been a good citizen since his discharge. However, good post service conduct alone is not a basis for upgrading a discharge.
2. The applicant’s contention that his record of convictions by civil authorities while he was in service indicates only minor or isolated offenses, is not supported by the evidence of record. There is no evidence of record available to the Board which shows the applicant had a record of convictions by civil authorities while he was in the Army.
3. The Board considered the applicant’s contentions that his ability to serve was impaired by his youth and immaturity, low aptitude scores and level of education, his deprived background, marital and family problems, personal problems, financial problems, use of alcohol and certain other problems. However, the applicant has provided no evidence to support these contentions.
4. The Board reviewed the applicant’s record of service which contains one nonjudicial punishment, three special court-martial convictions and 384 days of lost time and determined that his quality of service did not meet the standards of acceptable conduct and performance of duty for Army personnel. Therefore, the applicant is not entitled to an honorable discharge.
5. The overall merits of the case, including the latest submissions and arguments, are insufficient as a basis for the Board to reverse its previous decision.
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
CLA____ BJE_____ DPH_____ DENY APPLICATION
Carl W. S. Chun
| CASE ID | AR2002068023 |
| SUFFIX | |
| RECON | Yes - Originally boarded on 19990708 |
| DATE BOARDED | 20020613 |
| TYPE OF DISCHARGE | UD |
| DATE OF DISCHARGE | 19680823 |
| DISCHARGE AUTHORITY | 635-212 |
| DISCHARGE REASON | Unfitness |
| BOARD DECISION | Deny |
| REVIEW AUTHORITY | |
| ISSUES 1. | 110.0200 |
| 2. | |
| 3. | |
| 4. | |
| 5. | |
| 6. |
ARMY | BCMR | CY2012 | 20120016069
The applicant also states the FSM's discharge should be upgraded to honorable for the following reasons: * clemency is warranted because it is an injustice for him to suffer the adverse consequences of a bad discharge * under current standards, he would not have received the type of discharge he did * his average conduct and efficiency ratings/behavior/and proficiency marks were good * he received personal awards, decorations, and letters of recommendation * he had combat service * his...
AF | DRB | CY2003 | FD2002-0401
Add any'" '?.-) otl~cr issues that arc issues rhaf=$PIY tb $ur,~ate;:i~';~ : I . service acted correctly in characterizing my service as less than honorable does not ip& to my case because of the evidence I am submitting. 0 My record of convictions by civil authorities while I was in service indicates only minor or isolated offenses.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2006 | 20060004071C070205
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. He also contends that his ability to serve was impaired by his deprived background, family, marital, financial and personal problems; however, he has failed to show through the evidence submitted with his application and the evidence of record that such was the case. The applicant was actually AWOL...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2006 | 20060017312C071029
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 31 May 2007 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20060017312 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. Moreover, no matter what his recruiter may have told him, the DD Form 1966/5 informed the applicant that concealing a juvenile record at the time of his enlistment could subject him to discharge with an other...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 04983-01
Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your naval record and applicable statutes, regulations and policies. The Board noted your contention to the effect that marital problems and alcohol abuse were contributing factors in the prolonged period UA which led to your general court-martial conviction and bad conduct discharge. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record,...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100023082
THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE: 1. The applicant requests that his undesirable discharge be upgraded to an honorable discharge. Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel.
ARMY | BCMR | CY1980-1989 | 8309608A
The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein. He indicates that he had a mental health evaluation that found him to be immature and undisciplined due to coming from a deprived background. 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 | CY2001 | 2001056960C070420
EVIDENCE OF RECORD : The applicant's military records show: On 2 February 1968, a United States Army Board of Review found the GCM findings of guilty and sentence as approved by proper authority in the applicant’s case correct in law and fact. Further, the BCD portion of the sentence was not effected until he had been afforded all legal appeals and the findings and sentence were finally affirmed by a United States Army Board of Review.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002068216C070402
The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein. APPLICANT REQUESTS: That his general discharge be upgraded to honorable. 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:
NAVY | DRB | 2006_Navy | ND0600101
The Applicant requests the Discharge Characterization of Service received at the time of discharge be changed to general (under honorable conditions). Documentation In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the Applicant, was considered:Applicant’s DD Form 214 Department of Veterans Affair Statement in Support of Claim (4 pgs) PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge): Inactive: USNR...