| Mr. Carl W. S. Chun | Director | |
| Mr. William Blakely | Analyst |
| Mr. Samuel A. Crumpler | Chairperson | ||
| Mr. Kenneth W. Lapin | Member | ||
| Mr. John T. Meixell | Member |
APPLICANT REQUESTS: In effect, that his undesirable discharge (UD) be upgraded to a general, under honorable conditions discharge (GD).
APPLICANT STATES: In effect, that his separation from the Army was based on one isolated incident. He states that his company commander did not want him in his company, which resulted in his going absent without leave (AWOL) and receiving nonjudicial punishment (NJP).
EVIDENCE OF RECORD: The applicant's military records show:
On 14 September 1972, he enlisted in the Regular Army for 3 years. He successfully completed training and was awarded military occupational specialty (MOS) 11B (Light Weapons Infantryman).
The applicant’s record documents no acts of valor, significant achievement, or service warranting special recognition and confirms that the highest rank he attained while on active duty was private /E-2. However, it does show an extensive disciplinary history that includes his acceptance of NJP on the following three occasions for the offenses indicated: 5 March 1973, for being AWOL on 2 March 1973; 17 April 1973, for being AWOL from 14 April 1973 to
15 April 1973; and 1 May 1973, for being AWOL from 27 to 30 April 1973, disobeying a lawful command from a commissioned officer, and for wrongly possessing one ounce or more of marijuana.
The applicant’s discharge packet containing the specific facts and circumstances surrounding his discharge processing is not in the record. However, there is a properly constituted separation document (DD Form 214) on file that contains the authority and reason for discharge. This document was authenticated by the applicant with his signature and confirms that on 30 July 1973, he was discharged under the provisions of chapter 10, Army Regulation 635-200, in lieu of trial by court-martial. At the time of his discharge, he had completed a total of only 10 months and 17 days of creditable active military service.
There is no evidence that the applicant applied to the Army Discharge Review Board for an upgrade of his discharge within its 15-year statue 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 record is void of facts and circumstances concerning events that led to a discharge from the Army. The Board notes that his record contains a properly constituted DD Form 214, which was authenticated by the applicant with his signature, and it presumes government regularity in the discharge process.
2. The separation document confirms that the applicant was discharged in lieu of trial by court-martial. Procedurally, this would have required him to consult with legal counsel after being charged with the commission of an offense punishable under the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) with a punitive discharge. In addition, he would have had to voluntarily request separation after admitting guilt to the stipulated offense under the UCMJ.
3. Lacking independent evidence to the contrary, the Board is satisfied that all requirements of law and regulation were met and the rights of the applicant were fully protected throughout the separation process. Further, the Board finds the applicant’s good service during the initial portion of the enlistment was not sufficiently meritorious to warrant an upgrade of his discharge, and it concludes that the characterization of his service is commensurate with his overall record of service.
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
SAC KWL JTM DENY APPLICATION
| CASE ID | AR2002068279 |
| SUFFIX | |
| RECON | YYYYMMDD |
| DATE BOARDED | 2002/05/07 |
| TYPE OF DISCHARGE | (UOTHC,) |
| DATE OF DISCHARGE | 19730730 |
| DISCHARGE AUTHORITY | AR 635-200. . . . . |
| DISCHARGE REASON | In Lieu of CM |
| BOARD DECISION | (DENY) |
| REVIEW AUTHORITY | |
| ISSUES 1. | 144.7000 |
| 2. | |
| 3. | |
| 4. | |
| 5. | |
| 6. |
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002068610C070402
The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein. On 9 June 1976, the Army Discharge Review Board denied the applicant’s request for an upgrade of his discharge after determining that he had been properly discharged. 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 | CY2002 | 2002081041C070215
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: The evidence of record confirms that the applicant was in pre-trial confinement from 14 through 22 June 1972, that he was dropped from the rolls of his organization on 7 June 1972 and 15 March 1973, and that he was issued an Undesirable Discharge Certificate in accordance with the governing regulation in effect...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002071613C070402
The separation document (DD Form 214) issued to the applicant on the date of his separation from active duty confirms that he was discharged under the provisions of chapter 10, Army Regulation 635-200, for the good of the service/ in lieu of trial by court-martial. However, at the time of the applicant's separation the regulation provided for the issuance of UD. This document was authenticated by the applicant with his signature on the date of his discharge, in effect, verifying the...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002073397C070403
The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein. There is no evidence to show that the applicant applied to the Army Discharge Review Board to request an upgrade to his discharge within its 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...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2003 | 2003085161C070212
In accordance with Army Regulation 15-185, the application and the available military records pertinent to the corrective action requested were reviewed to determine whether to authorize a formal hearing, recommend that the records be corrected without a formal hearing, or to deny the application without a formal hearing if it is determined that insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate the existence of probable material error or injustice. EVIDENCE OF RECORD : The...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002076030C070215
The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein. APPLICANT REQUESTS: In effect, that his undesirable discharge (UD) be upgraded to an honorable discharge (HD). The evidence of record confirms that the applicant’s discharge processing was accomplished in accordance with the applicable regulations in effect at the time and that the type of discharge he received accurately reflects his overall record of service.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080011874
The applicant requests, in effect, that his discharge be upgraded from an undesirable discharge to an honorable discharge. The evidence does include a properly constituted DD Form 214 authenticated by the applicant that contains the authority and reason for the applicants active duty discharge on 18 March 1974, in pay grade E-1, under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, Chapter 10, with an undesirable discharge, characterized as under other than honorable conditions by reason of the...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2007 | 20070016966C080407
THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE: 1. The applicant’s record shows he enlisted into the Regular Army and entered active duty on 29 December 1972. However, the regulation does allow the issuance of a general discharge (GD), under honorable conditions discharge; or an honorable discharge (HD), if the separation authority determines it is warranted based on the member's overall record of service.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002077085C070215
The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein. He now requests that his discharge be upgraded. However, at the time of the applicant's separation the regulation provided for the issuance of an undesirable discharge.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002079047C070215
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: 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...