| Mr. Carl W. S. Chun | Director | |
| Mrs. Joyce A. Hall | Analyst |
| Mr. Raymond V. O’Connor, Jr. | Chairperson | ||
| Mr. Richard T. Dunbar | Member | ||
| Mr. Kenneth W. Lapin | Member |
APPLICANT REQUESTS: In effect, that his discharge under other than honorable conditions (UOTHC) be upgraded to a good discharge.
APPLICANT STATES: He makes no contentions.
EVIDENCE OF RECORD: The applicant's military records show:
On 29 July 1971, the applicant enlisted in the Regular Army for 2 years. He completed basic combat training and advanced individual training and was awarded military occupational specialty 94B20 (Cook). The highest pay grade he achieved was pay grade E-2.
On 20 October 1971, while assigned to a unit located at Fort Knox, Kentucky, the applicant accepted nonjudicial punishment (NJP) under Article 15, Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ), for failure to repair and for dereliction of duty. His imposed punishment was a forfeiture of $25.00 pay, 14 days restriction, and
14 days extra duty.
On 18 November 1971, the applicant accepted NJP for being absent without leave (AWOL) from 2 to 10 November 1971. His imposed punishment was a forfeiture of $70.00 pay and 15 days correctional custody.
On 25 January 1972, the applicant accepted NJP for intent to defraud, for the procurement of lawful currency, by wrongfully and unlawfully uttering a savings bond for payment. His imposed punishment was a forfeiture of $100.00 pay per month for 2 months.
On or about 28 January 1972, the applicant departed for assignment in Korea.
He was assigned to the 258th Signal Company, 307th Signal Battalion as a cook.
On 13 March 1972, the applicant accepted NJP for failure to repair and for being disrespectful in language to a senior noncommissioned officer. His imposed punishment was a forfeiture of $70.00 pay, reduction to the grade of private (suspended for 30 days), and 14 days restriction.
On 21 August 1972, the applicant was convicted by a special court-martial
(SPCM) of failing to obey a lawful order, of having in his possession a straight razor, of being AWOL from 8 to 15 June 1972, and being AWOL from 15 June to 10 July 1972. He was sentenced to a reduction to pay grade E-1, a forfeiture of
$190.00 pay per month for 5 months (suspended until 20 January 1973), and confinement at hard labor (CHL) for 5 months (suspended until 20 January
1973).
On 14 February 1973, while assigned to Headquarters Company, 58th Signal Battalion, Fort Lewis, Washington, the applicant accepted NJP for failure to repair on 6 and 8 February 1973. His imposed punishment was a forfeiture of $35.00 pay and 7 days extra duty.
On 8 March 1973, the applicant was barred from reenlistment by his company commander.
29 March 1973, the applicant accepted NJP for being AWOL on 9 different occasions, all less than 24 hours. His imposed punishment was a forfeiture of $40.00 pay per month for 2 months and 30 days restriction and extra duty.
On 6 September 1973, the applicant accepted NJP for being AWOL from
24 to 28 August 1973. His imposed punishment was a forfeiture of $150.00 pay,
45 days restriction, and 30 days extra duty.
On 30 June 1973, the applicant was convicted by a SPCM of assault upon an enlisted soldier by threatening him with a club and disobeying a lawful order
from a superior commissioned officer. He was sentenced to a forfeiture of $150.00 pay per month for 2 months and CHL for 2 months.
On 24 July 1973, a physical evaluation found the applicant qualified for separation. However, the applicant’s mental evaluation is missing from his record.
The applicant’s discharge proceedings are not available. Veterans Administration Request for Information (VA Form 07-3101) dated 3 December
1973, filed in the applicant’s service record shows that the facts and circumstances surrounding his discharge were forwarded to its Regional Office in Seattle, Washington.
The applicant’s record shows that he was discharged on 7 November 1973, under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 13, for unfitness with a discharge UOTHC. His Armed Forces of the United States Report of Transfer or Discharge (DD Form 214) shows that he completed 1 year, 10 months and
6 days of creditable active service and he had 153 days of time lost.
Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel for unfitness or unsuitability. The regulation provided, in pertinent part, that commanders will separate a member under this chapter
when, in the commander’s judgment, the member will not develop sufficiently to participate satisfactorily in further training and/or become satisfactory soldier. When separation for unfitness was warranted, a discharge UOTHC 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. 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. In the absence of the applicant’s discharge proceedings the Board can only presume that the applicant’s discharge was conducted in accordance with law and regulations applicable at the time. The character of the discharge is commensurate with the applicant’s overall record of military service.
3. 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
__RVO__ __RTD__ __KWL__ DENY APPLICATION
| CASE ID | AR2002069277 |
| SUFFIX | |
| RECON | YYYYMMDD |
| DATE BOARDED | 2002/07/25 |
| TYPE OF DISCHARGE | UOTHC |
| DATE OF DISCHARGE | 1973/11/07 |
| DISCHARGE AUTHORITY | AR635-200, chapter 13 |
| DISCHARGE REASON | A51.00 |
| BOARD DECISION | DENY |
| REVIEW AUTHORITY | |
| ISSUES 1. | 144.5000 |
| 2. | |
| 3. | |
| 4. | |
| 5. | |
| 6. |
ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090004021
Application for correction of military records (with supporting documents provided, if any). On 20 May 1975, the applicant was discharged accordingly. 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.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2003 | 2003086541C070212
In a statement dated 25 February 1974, the applicant's first sergeant stated that he had been told by the applicant that he was having problems at home. When separation for unfitness was warranted, a discharge under other than honorable conditions was normally considered appropriate. Based on the applicant's record of indiscipline, the Board determined that his quality of service did not meet the standards of acceptable conduct and performance of duty for Army personnel.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080003928
His records do not show any significant acts of valor during his military service. This form further shows the applicant's character of service as bad conduct and that he completed 4 years, 3 months, and 18 days of creditable military service. Conviction and discharge were effected in accordance with applicable law and regulations, and the discharge appropriately characterized the misconduct for which the applicant was convicted.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2001 | 2001058467C070421
The Board considered the following evidence: There is no record of punishment. On 2 May 1972, the applicant was discharged in pay grade E-2 under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-212, for unsuitability with a general discharge.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2005 | 20050001221C070206
Title 10, U.S. Code, Section 1552(b), provides that applications for correction of military records must be filed within 3 years after discovery of the alleged error or injustice. On 30 November 1977 and 18 August 1981, the Army Discharge Review Board (ADRB) denied the applicant's request for an upgrade of his discharge to honorable. Records show the applicant should have discovered the alleged error or injustice now under consideration on 18 August 1981, the date of the ADRB review;...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2005 | 20050001221C070206
Title 10, U.S. Code, Section 1552(b), provides that applications for correction of military records must be filed within 3 years after discovery of the alleged error or injustice. On 30 November 1977 and 18 August 1981, the Army Discharge Review Board (ADRB) denied the applicant's request for an upgrade of his discharge to honorable. Records show the applicant should have discovered the alleged error or injustice now under consideration on 18 August 1981, the date of the ADRB review;...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2001 | 2001063136C070421
The Board considered the following evidence: He was sentenced to a reduction to pay grade E-1, a forfeiture of $60 pay per month for 6 months and confinement at hard labor (CHL) for 6 months. On 17 August 1966, the applicant was discharged in pay grade E-1, under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-208 for unfitness with a discharge UOTHC.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2005 | 20050014035C070206
William F. Crain | |Member | The Board considered the following evidence: Exhibit A - Application for correction of military records. The applicant’s military record shows that he had an extensive disciplinary history of military infraction and based on his record of indiscipline, the applicant's service clearly shows that his discharge was appropriate because the quality of service determined at the time of discharge was not consistent with the Army’s standards for acceptable personal...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002080923C070215
The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein. He was advanced to the pay grade of E-3 on 30 January 1974 and on 25 February 1974, he was honorably released from active duty (REFRAD) on the expiration of his term of service (ETS). There is no indication 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 | 2002076664C070215
Conviction and discharge were effected in accordance with applicable law and regulations, and the discharge appropriately characterizes the misconduct for which the applicant was convicted. The applicant’s contentions regarding his discharge have been noted by the Board. In view of the foregoing, the applicant’s records should be corrected as recommended below.