Search Decisions

Decision Text

ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002069888C070402
Original file (2002069888C070402.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied
MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION


         IN THE CASE OF:
        


         BOARD DATE: 20 August 2002
         DOCKET NUMBER: AR2002069888

         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.

Mr. Carl W. S. Chun Director
Ms. Rosa M. Chandler Analyst


The following members, a quorum, were present:

Ms. Melinda M. Darby Chairperson
Mr. Roger W. Able Member
Mr. Curtis L. Greenway Member

         The Board, established pursuant to authority contained in 10 U.S.C. 1552, convened at the call of the Chairperson on the above date. 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.

         The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein.

         The Board considered the following evidence:

         Exhibit A - Application for correction of military
records
         Exhibit B - Military Personnel Records (including
         advisory opinion, if any)


APPLICANT REQUESTS: That his undesirable discharge (UD) be upgraded to a fully honorable discharge.

APPLICANT STATES: In a letter to the Board, dated 22 August 2001, that he has turned his life around since being separated from the military. He is currently a Deputy Sheriff with the Grant County (Arkansas) Sheriff's Department. He has worked in law enforcement for the past 13 years and he participates in various community activities and programs, speaking to children about the pressures and effects of drugs and alcohol. He also states that he needs Department of Veterans Affairs (DVA) medical benefits. In support of his application, he submits a copy of his DD Forms 214 (Armed Forces of the United States Report of Transfer or Discharge) issued on 9 November 1970 and on 5 May 1972, a character reference letter from a State Judge, a character reference letter from a State Legislator, and a character reference letter from a retired State Judge.

EVIDENCE OF RECORD: The applicant's military records show:

He was born on 4 June 1954 and enlisted in the Regular Army (RA) for 3 years on 15 September 1970. He was separated on 9 November 1970 by reason of minority. On 9 June 1971, he again enlisted in the RA for a period of 3 years. He completed basic combat training and advanced individual training and he was awarded military occupational specialty (MOS) 11H (Indirect Fire Crewman). On 27 December 1971, he was assigned to Fort Ord, California.

On 4 February 1972, the applicant informed his chain of command that he had been a heroin user since age 13 and he asked for help. On 11 February 1972, he was enrolled in the Drug Amnesty Program. On 12 February 1972, he quit the program stating that he did not like the counselors and that he would "kick the [heroin] habit himself."

On 28 February 1972, nonjudicial punishment (NJP) under the provisions of Article 15, Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ), was imposed against the applicant for twice failing to go to his appointed place of duty at the time prescribed on 4 February 1972 and on 7 February 1972. His punishment included forfeiture of $75.00 pay per month for 1 month and 14 days of extra duty and restriction.

On 10 March 1972, the applicant underwent a physical evaluation that determined he was qualified for separation.

On 13 March 1972, summary court-martial charges were preferred against the applicant for wrongfully using a habit-forming narcotic drug (heroin) and for willfully and maliciously setting fire to two buildings the property of the US Government. The buildings were valued at $6,000 and $10,000. He was also charged with willfully and maliciously attempting to set fire to a third building by deliberately overturning a 55-gallon barrel containing about 35 gallons of fuel next to the building and stating that he was about to burn down the building. All three buildings were located at Hunter Liggett Military Reservation, Jolon, California and all three incidents occurred on 27 February 1972.

On 15 March 1972, the applicant's commander recommend that he be separated prior to the expiration of his term of service under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-212, due to unfitness, with a UD. He also recommended that further rehabilitative efforts be waived. He cited as the reason for the recommendation the applicant's recurring offenses against the US Army and the use of drugs.

On 21 March 1972, the applicant authenticated a statement in which he acknowledged that he had consulted with legal counsel and he acknowledged that he had been advised of the basis for the contemplated action to separate him under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-212, for unfitness. He further acknowledged that he understood the effects of a UD, and that he would be ineligible to receive veteran's benefits. He also waived further representation by legal counsel and a personal appearance before a board of officers. He did not submit a statement in his own behalf.

On an unknown date, the battalion commander recommended separation with a UD. On 3 April 1972, the brigade commander recommended separation with a UD. The brigade commander cited the applicant's admission that drug abuse had contributed to his decline as a soldier and aggravated his tendencies toward destruction of government property. He was caught setting fire to material in an Army building and he admitted to using heroin prior to the offense. He was also suspected of being involved in two other incidents of attempted arson on the same date. Therefore, the brigade commander believed the applicant's propensity towards drug abuse and the destruction of property indicated that further retention would constitute an undue hazard to the unit and the Army.

On 4 April 1972, the applicant underwent a mental status evaluation that determined he met retention standards. He was determined to be mentally responsible and to be able to distinguish right from wrong and to adhere to the right. He was also determined to have the mental capacity to understand and participate in board proceedings.

On 11 April 1972, competent authority waived further rehabilitation, approved the recommendation, and directed that the applicant be separated under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-212, for unfitness, with a UD.

On 5 May 1972, the applicant was discharged under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-212, for unfitness, with a UD. He had completed 10 months and 27 days of active military service and he had no recorded lost time. Item 16c (Date of Entry) on his DD Form 214 contains an administrative error. His enlistment date is shown as 9 July 1971 vice 9 June 1971; however, his total service is properly calculated.

There is no evidence that the applicant ever applied to the Army Discharge Review Board for review of his discharge under that board's 15-year statute of limitations.

Army Regulation 635-212, in effect at the time, set forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel and provided, in pertinent part, that members involved in the unauthorized use or possession of habit forming narcotic drugs or marijuana were subject to separation for unfitness. A UD 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. The applicant's administrative separation was accomplished in compliance with applicable regulations, then in effect, with no indication of procedural errors which would have jeopardized his rights.

3. The quality of the applicant's service was not consistent with the Army's standards for acceptable personal conduct and performance of duty by military personnel. His service record fully supports both the reason for discharge and the characterization of his service. The applicant has provided no evidence to the contrary.

4. The applicant underwent both a mental status and a medical examination prior to being separated and he was determined to be fully qualified for separation. He had no service-connected illnesses, injuries, or disabilities.

5. The Board congratulates the applicant on his achievements since departing the Army. However, the Board does not grant relief based solely on post service conduct or solely for the purpose of gaining veteran's benefits.

6. Additionally, the applicant may request that this Board correct Item 16c on his DD 214 to show that he enlisted in the RA on 9 June 1971 vice 9 July 1971.

7. 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

__mmd___ __rwa___ __clg___ DENY APPLICATION



                  Carl W. S. Chun
                  Director, Army Board for Correction
of Military Records




INDEX

CASE ID AR2002069888
SUFFIX
RECON
DATE BOARDED 20020820
TYPE OF DISCHARGE (UD)
DATE OF DISCHARGE 19720505
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY AR635-212
DISCHARGE REASON A51.00
BOARD DECISION (DENY)
REVIEW AUTHORITY
ISSUES 1. 144.5000
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.


Similar Decisions

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002072980C070403

    Original file (2002072980C070403.rtf) Auto-classification: Approved

    The applicant requests that the phrase "Drug Abuse" be deleted from Item 28 (Narrative Reason for Separation) on his DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) and that his DD Form 214 be corrected to show all awards and citations earned, including four bronze service stars (BSS) in lieu of one silver service star, and the Vietnam Gallantry Cross (sic). On 28 December 1971, the applicant was assigned to the United States Army Drug Abuser Holding Center, Vietnam...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002067635C070402

    Original file (2002067635C070402.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein. The Board considered the following evidence: The appropriate authority approved the bar to reenlistment on 5 November 1971.

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY1996 | 9606509C070209

    Original file (9606509C070209.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    APPLICANT REQUESTS: In effect, the applicant requests that his undesirable discharge be upgraded to honorable. PURPOSE: To determine whether the application was submitted within the time limit established by law, and if not, whether it is in the interest of justice to excuse the failure to timely file. On 12 March 1972 the applicant’s commanding officer recommended to the separation authority that the applicant be discharged and that he receive an Undesirable Discharge Certificate.

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2003 | 2003090196C070212

    Original file (2003090196C070212.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant states that after he was discharged, he continued to use alcohol and drugs. A review of the available records fails to show that the applicant ever applied to the Army Discharge Review Board for an upgrade of his discharge within that board’s 15-years statute of limitations. The Board determined that the evidence presented and the merits of this case are insufficient to warrant the relief requested, and therefore, it would not be in the interest of justice to excuse the...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2003 | 2003090084C070212

    Original file (2003090084C070212.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein. It is issued to a soldier whose military record is satisfactory but not sufficiently meritorious to warrant an honorable 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:

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080005934

    Original file (20080005934.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    His service medical records of his attempted suicide, the diagnosed PTSD from combat service with the VA medical records, and his psychiatric evaluation during his discharge proceedings should have been made available to the previous Board. The applicant further stated that in February 1971 he was discharged from the Army. Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 3-7b, provides that a general discharge is a separation from the Army under honorable conditions.

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090017276

    Original file (20090017276.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Application for correction of military records (with supporting documents provided, if any). The applicant requests, in effect, that his undesirable discharge (UD) be upgraded to a general, under honorable conditions discharge (GD). Paragraph 3-7b of the same regulation provides that a GD is a separation from the Army under honorable conditions.

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002072387C070403

    Original file (2002072387C070403.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein. On 21 October 1971, the applicant’s commander notified him of recommended separation under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-212, for unfitness. On 15 March 1972, the separation authority approved the board’s recommen-dation and directed that he be discharged with a UD, under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-212, for unfitness.

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2013 | 20130022133

    Original file (20130022133.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    He states, in effect, the punishment he received as a result of court-martial was unjust. The evidence of record does not support the applicant's request for an upgrade of his UD. He contends that his drug use rendered him a helpless heroin addict, and if he had been sent to the hospital for detoxification and treatment instead of being tried by court-martial (i.e., instead of appearing before a board of officers considering the recommendation to administratively discharge him), his Army...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2012 | 20120021602

    Original file (20120021602.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    On 25 July 1972, the separation authority approved the applicant's separation under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-212 and directed the issuance of a General Discharge Certificate. As a result, the Board recommends that all Department of the Army records of the individual concerned be corrected by issuing him a new DD Form 214 showing his character of service as honorable and an Honorable Discharge Certificate, dated 25 August 1972, in lieu of the DD Form 214 and General Discharge...