| Mr. Carl W. S. Chun | Director | |
| Ms. Deyon D. Battle | Analyst |
| Ms. Jennifer L. Prater | Chairperson | |
| Mr. Hubert O. Fry | Member | |
| Ms. Gail J. Wire | Member |
2. The applicant requests that his general discharge be upgraded to an honorable discharge.
3. The applicant states that the only reason that he was not furnished an honorable discharge was because his company commander had a personal grudge against him. He states that he was court-martialed for driving an Army vehicle without a trip ticket. He states that the vehicle in question was an ambulance, which he normally drove and he used it to get some sandwiches for a bunch of his friends who were celebrating his scheduled rotation back to the United States. He goes on to state that he knows that he was wrong for taking the vehicle; however, it was often done and the usual punishment was a verbal reprimand or at the very worst, nonjudicial punishment. He states that he was court-martialed and he believes that he was singled out by a bigoted person in a position of authority.
4. The applicant’s military records show that after he completed 2 years of service in the New York Army National Guard (NYARNG), on 25 March 1959, he enlisted in the Army for 3 years in the pay grade of E-1. He was immediately promoted to the pay grade of E-2 and he went on to successfully complete his training as a clerk.
5. On 11 February 1961, he was promoted to the pay grade of E-3.
6. On 10 April 1962, the applicant was convicted by a summary court-martial of being absent from his unit billets from 2400 hours until 0230 hours and for wrongfully appropriating a United States Army Opel Ambulance. He was sentenced to a reduction to the pay grade of E-2 and a forfeiture of pay.
7. He was released from active duty on 7 May 1962, at the expiration of his term of service without further incident. He was transferred to the United States Army Reserve Control Group (Reinforcement) to complete his reserve obligation. He successfully completed his reserve obligation and he was discharged on 28 February 1965. He had completed 3 years, 1 months and 13 days of total active service and he was furnished a General Discharge Certificate.
8. There is no evidence of record that shows that the applicant ever applied to the Army Discharge Review Board for an upgrade of his records within that board’s 15-year statute of limitations.
9. Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel. Chapter 3 covers types of characterization or description of discharges. Paragraph 3-7 applies to administrative discharges and character of service and provides that a general discharge is a separation from the Army under honorable conditions. When authorized, it is issued to a soldier whose military record is satisfactory but not sufficiently meritorious to warrant an honorable discharge. A characterization of under honorable conditions may be issued only when the reason for the soldier’s separation specifically allows such characterization. It will not be issued to soldiers upon separation at expiration of their period of enlistment, military service obligation, or period for which called or ordered to active duty.
CONCLUSIONS:
1. Although the applicant was discharged under honorable conditions, it appears that his general discharge was based on one isolated incident.
2. He completed 2 years of inactive service in the NYARNG prior to enlisting in the Army for 3 years. While he was convicted by a summary court-martial of being absent from his unit billets from 2400 hours until 0230 hours and for wrongfully appropriating a United States Army Opel Ambulance, the records fail to show any prior acts of misconduct and he remained in the Army until the expiration of his term of enlistment.
3. The Board has noted that the applicant’s court-martial conviction occurred on 10 April 1962 (less than 30 days prior to his release from active duty). He was released from active duty on 7 May 1962 and he was transferred to the USAR Control Group where he completed his reserve obligation on 28 February 1965, without incident. Consequently, the applicant was entitled to an honorable discharge based on his overall record of service and because the general discharge was furnished to him at the expiration of his term of enlistment.
4. In view of the foregoing, it would be in the interest of justice to correct the applicant’s records as recommended below.
RECOMMENDATION:
1. That all of the Department of the Army records related to this case be corrected by showing that the individual concerned was separated from the service with an Honorable Discharge Certificate on 7 May 1962.
2. That the Department of the Army issue the individual concerned an Honorable Discharge Certificate from the Army of the United States, dated 7 May 1962, in lieu of the general discharge of the same date now held by him.
BOARD VOTE:
___gw___ __hof ___ ___jlp___ GRANT AS STATED IN RECOMMENDATION
________ ________ ________ GRANT FORMAL HEARING
________ ________ ________ DENY APPLICATION
____Jennifer L. Prater_____
CHAIRPERSON
| CASE ID | AR2002070470 |
| SUFFIX | |
| RECON | YYYYMMDD |
| DATE BOARDED | 2002/07/23 |
| TYPE OF DISCHARGE | GD |
| DATE OF DISCHARGE | 1966/05/07 |
| DISCHARGE AUTHORITY | AR 635-200 |
| DISCHARGE REASON | 455 |
| BOARD DECISION | GRANT |
| REVIEW AUTHORITY | |
| ISSUES 1. 456 | 144.0300 |
| 2. | |
| 3. | |
| 4. | |
| 5. | |
| 6. |
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002073879C070403
The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein. On 14 October 1963, the applicant was ordered to appear before a board of officers to be convened on 30 October 1963 to determine if he should be discharged from the service under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-208. The Board noted the applicant’s letter and other complimentary letters of support which the applicant submitted with his application; however, these...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2004 | 01923-04
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.After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire record, the Board found that the evidence submitted was insufficient establish the existence of probable materia1 error or injustice.You enlisted in the Navy on 9 November 1960 at age 17. The Board found that these factors and...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080015413
The applicant requests that his military records be corrected to show he was discharged from the U.S. Army Reserve (USAR) on 8 February 1997 instead of 4 December 2001. Therefore, as a matter of equity, in this case only, it would be appropriate to correct the applicant's military records to show he was discharged from the USAR on 8 February 1997 and that he had a break in service from 9 February 1997 to 4 April 2006. As a result, the Board recommends that all Department of the Army...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2005 | 20050017368C070206
However, his DD Form 214 shows he was discharged on 6 July 1971 under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, for the good of the service with issuance of an under other than honorable conditions (undesirable) discharge. He completed 4 years, 10 months and 2 days of active military service during the period under review. There is no evidence of record which shows the applicant applied to the Army Discharge Review Board (ADRB) within its 15-year statute of limitations.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140016021
The applicant requests an upgrade of his under other than honorable conditions discharge to an honorable discharge. The applicant states, in effect, he has served honorably in the New York Army National Guard (NYARNG) since his 1996 discharge. Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002070724C070402
The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein. A member’s service may be characterized as general by the commanding officer authorized to take such action. The applicant’s service was properly characterized in accordance with the applicable regulations in effect at the time and the applicant has failed to show through the evidence submitted with his application or the evidence of record that his service warranted a...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100030103
THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE: 1. The applicant [P.J.A.] further related that after checking several vans, he found one with what he believed to be cigarettes in it and removed the contents (approximately 18 large crates) to an area adjacent to the paint shed behind the 1st Transportation Company billets on WODK and that then, with the help of SP5 [P.J.A.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2005 | 20050004526C070206
On 27 July 1973, the applicant was honorably discharged from active duty and transferred to NYARNG to complete his remaining service obligation. These orders further show that the applicant was to be discharged from the Regular Army on 8 February 1980. The applicant's DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) with an effective date of 8 February 1980, shows that he was separated under the provisions of chapter 10 of Army Regulation 635-200 and that his character of...
USMC | DRB | 2000_Marine | MD00-00166
MD00-00166 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 991112, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable. Reference his attempt to form his own company. After a thorough review of the records, supporting documents, facts, and circumstances unique to this case, the Board found that the discharge was proper and equitable (C and D).The applicant’s issue, and that of his representative, is that he warrants clemency because he...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2001 | 2001056270C070420
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: There is no evidence in the available records to show that the applicant ever applied to the Army Discharge Review Board for an upgrade of his discharge within that board’s 15-year statute of limitations.