| Mr. Carl W. S. Chun | Director | |
| Mr. W. W. Osborn, Jr. | Analyst |
| Ms. Celia L. Adolphi | Chairperson | |
| Mr. Melvin H. Meyer | Member | |
| Mr. John T. Meixell | Member |
APPLICANT REQUESTS: In effect, that his discharge be upgraded to honorable.
APPLICANT STATES: He asks that the discharge be upgraded for him and for his children's sake. He has lived since 1977 without any Veteran's benefits. Now his health is getting worse. He lives at home and cares for his ageing mother, who had a double bypass surgery.
EVIDENCE OF RECORD: The applicant's military records show:
The applicant enlisted on 11 February 1975, completed training as an infantryman and was assigned to Germany. He was advanced to private first class (E-3) on 4 December 1975. On 7 October 1976 he was reassigned to Fort Hood, Texas.
He received nonjudicial punishments (NJPs) under Article 15, Uniform Code of Military Justice as follows:
On 31 March 1976, for assault on and disrespect to a noncommissioned officer (NCO).
On 20 December 1976, for possession of an ounce of marijuana and communicating a threat to an NCO.
On 9 February 1977, for willful disobedience of and disrespect to an NCO.
On 4 March 1977, for absence without leave (AWOL) for less than 1 day.
Between 26 January and 1 March 1977, the applicant was also counseled on seven occasions about his bad attitude, sloppy appearance, poor work habits, failure to follow orders and disobedience.
On 25 February 1977, he was notified of contemplated elimination due to frequent incidents of a discreditable nature with civil or military authorities. The applicant consulted with counsel and waived his rights to have a board of officers consider his case, to appear before such board and to be represented by counsel and he declined to offer statements in his own behalf.
The separation authority waived any rehabilitation requirements, approved the recommended separation and directed that the applicant be discharged under other than honorable conditions (UOTHC).
On 16 May 1977 the applicant was discharged UOTHC under the provision of Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 13-5a(1).
Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the policy and prescribes the procedures for administrative separation of enlisted personnel. Chapter 13, in effect at that time, applied to separation for unfitness and unsuitability. Paragraph 13-5(a)1 provided for the separation for unfitness, which included frequent incidents of a discreditable nature, sexual perversion, drug abuse, shirking, failure to pay just debts, failure to support dependents and homosexual acts. When separation for unfitness was warranted an undesirable discharge 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. The discharge proceedings were 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.
2. 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.
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
__CLA __ __MHM__ __JTM __ DENY APPLICATION
| CASE ID | AR2002070362 |
| SUFFIX | |
| RECON | |
| DATE BOARDED | 20020905 |
| TYPE OF DISCHARGE | UOTHC, UD |
| DATE OF DISCHARGE | 19770516 |
| DISCHARGE AUTHORITY | AR635-200, chapter 13. . . . . |
| DISCHARGE REASON | A64.00 |
| BOARD DECISION | |
| REVIEW AUTHORITY | |
| ISSUES 1. | |
| 2. | |
| 3. | |
| 4. | |
| 5. | |
| 6. |
ARMY | BCMR | CY2003 | 2003091009C070212
He requested consideration of his case by a board of officers. The applicant was present at the board proceedings and was represented by counsel. The board recommended that the applicant be discharged because of misconduct with a discharge certificate under other than honorable conditions.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002068651C070402
He was involuntarily ordered to active duty from the Army National Guard of the United States on 14 August 1975 for a period of 19 months and 12 days. On 7 October 1981, the Army Discharge Review Board (ADRB) denied the applicant's request for an upgrade of his discharge. Army policy states that although an honorable or general discharge is authorized, a UOTHC discharge is normally considered appropriate.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002079904C070215
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. 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...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2012 | 20120010322
His enlistment contract indicates he enlisted for training in MOS 91B and airborne training. The applicant's service record reveals he enlisted in the service for training in MOS 91B and for airborne training. However, his service record is void of evidence which shows he completed airborne training.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140016291
There is no indication that the applicant applied to the Army Discharge Review Board for an upgrade of his discharge within its 15-year statute of limitations. When authorized, it is issued to a Soldier whose military record is satisfactory but not sufficiently meritorious to warrant an honorable discharge. The applicant's contention that his chain of command was the cause of his becoming an alcoholic is not supported by any of the available evidence.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2005 | 20050016056C070206
On 14 October 1975, nonjudicial punishment was imposed against the applicant for disorderly conduct (two specifications). There is no evidence in the available records which shows the applicant applied to the Army Discharge Review Board within its 15-year statute of limitations. Since the applicant’s record of service included nine nonjudicial punishments and 24 days of lost time, his record of service was not satisfactory and did not meet the standards of acceptable conduct...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2003 | 2003089039C070403
The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein. The noncommissioned officer (NCO) counseling the applicant stated that the applicant continued to have a drinking problem after the counseling. When separation for unfitness was warranted an undesirable discharge was normally considered appropriate.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2012 | 20120001023
The applicant's discharge packet is not available for review; however, his official military personnel file (OMPF) contains a DD form 214 (Report of Separation from Active Duty) that shows on 1 December 1976, he was discharged under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations Enlisted Personnel), paragraph 13-5a(1) with a separation program designator (SPD) code of JKA for unfitness by reason of frequent involvement of a discreditable nature with military or civilian...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002074695C070403
The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein. On 3 November 1977, the applicant’s commander initiated action to separate the applicant from the service under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 13 for misconduct due to his frequent involvement in incidents of a discreditable nature with civil and military authorities. There is no indication in the available records to show that the applicant applied to...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140006706
The applicant requests upgrade of his discharge, from an under other than honorable conditions (UOTHC) discharge to a general discharge. The applicant states he would not have requested the discharge he received if he had better understood what the discharge meant. At the time, a UOTHC discharge was normally considered appropriate for Soldiers separated under chapter 13 of Army Regulation 635-200.