| Mr. Carl W. S. Chun | Director | |
| Mr. Jessie B. Strickland | Analyst |
| Ms. JoAnn H. Langston | Chairperson | |
| Ms. Melinda M. Darby | Member | |
| Mr. Ronald E. Blakely | Member |
APPLICANT REQUESTS: That his general discharge be upgraded to honorable.
APPLICANT STATES: In effect, that he was inducted and completed his basic training before being discharged. He goes on to state that he received a Sharpshooter Marksmanship Qualification Badge and believes it warrants an honorable discharge and classification as a veteran.
EVIDENCE OF RECORD: The applicant's military records, though somewhat incomplete, show:
He was inducted at Fort Richardson, Alaska, on 11 May 1965 and was transferred to Fort Ord, California, to undergo his basic combat training. He completed his BCT and was awarded the Sharpshooter Marksmanship Badge.
The facts and circumstances surrounding his discharge are not present in the available records. However, his records do contain a duly constituted report of separation (DD Form 214) which shows that he was discharged under honorable conditions at Fort Richardson, Alaska, on 6 August 1965, under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-206, paragraph 13b, for misconduct based on fraudulent entry into the Army involving conviction by civil authorities. He had served 2 months and 26 days of total active service.
His records also contain a Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) record dated 25 May 1965, which shows that the applicant had 12 arrests in Alaska prior to his induction, for offenses ranging from drunk in public, hit and run, disorderly conduct, assault and battery, and joy riding.
There is no indication 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.
Army Regulation 635-206, in effect at the time, set forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel. It provided, in pertinent part, that separation action for misconduct would be initiated against personnel for misconduct when it was determined that individuals had concealed their civilian arrest record at the time of entry into active duty or that they had been convicted by civil authorities. An undesirable discharge was normally considered appropriate. However, commanders could issue an honorable or general discharge if their record of service so warranted.
Army Regulation 635-200, currently in effect, sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel for fraudulent entry. It provides, in pertinent part, that personnel who are separated for fraudulent entry (concealment of conviction by civil court) will have their service terminated with no characterization of service or credit for any service performed.
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 the absence of evidence of the contrary, it must be presumed that the applicant’s administrative separation was accomplished in compliance with applicable regulations with no violations or procedural errors which would tend to jeopardize his rights.
2. Accordingly, the type of discharge directed and the reasons therefor were appropriate considering all of the available facts of the case.
3. The applicant’s contentions have been noted by the Board. However, given the lack of information available in this case and the very short amount of time he served, the Board finds no basis to warrant an upgrade of his discharge.
4. The Board has no authority to administer the regulations of the Department of Veterans Affairs and as such, has no authority to determine the applicant’s eligibility for such benefits. Such determinations are obtained from that agency by the individual concerned.
5. 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.
6. 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
___md___ ___jhl___ ___reb __ DENY APPLICATION
| CASE ID | AR2002073433 |
| SUFFIX | |
| RECON | YYYYMMDD |
| DATE BOARDED | 2002/09/19 |
| TYPE OF DISCHARGE | GD |
| DATE OF DISCHARGE | 1965/08/06 |
| DISCHARGE AUTHORITY | AR635-206 |
| DISCHARGE REASON | MISCONDUCT/FRAUD ENTRY |
| BOARD DECISION | DENY |
| REVIEW AUTHORITY | |
| ISSUES 1. 644 | 144.6200/A62.00 |
| 2. | |
| 3. | |
| 4. | |
| 5. | |
| 6. |
ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100012556
THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE: 1. A DD Form 398 (Statement of Personal History) was completed by the applicant prior to entering military service. The evidence of record confirms that the applicant was separated on 1 September 1965 under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-206, section II, for fraudulent entry by concealing previous civil arrests.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2007 | 20070000860C071029
Army Regulation 635-40 also states, in pertinent part, that an enlisted Soldier may not be referred for, or continue, physical disability processing when action has been started under any regulatory provision which authorizes a characterization of service of under other than honorable conditions unless the general court-martial convening authority finds that the disability is the cause, or a substantial contributing cause, of the misconduct that might result in a discharge under other...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080012228
This provision of law also allows the Army Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR) to excuse an applicants failure to timely file within the 3-year statute of limitations if the ABCMR determines it would be in the interest of justice to do so. Evidence of record shows the same SSN was used at the time of the applicants enlistment and discharge. Since the governing regulation states that a DD Form 214 would not be issued to enlisted personnel who were dropped from a period of...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140008174
On 29 November 1962, the applicant was notified by his immediate commander that discharge action was being initiated against him under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-206, for fraudulent enlistment. There is no evidence he applied to the Army Discharge Review Board for an upgrade of his discharge within that board's 15-year statute of limitations. Army Regulation 635-200 (Active Duty Enlisted Administrative Separations), paragraph 3-7a, provides that an honorable discharge is a...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002073328C070403
EVIDENCE OF RECORD : The applicant's military records show: The FBI report shows that the applicant had been arrested in November 1963 for indecent exposure and in September 1966 for disturbing the peace and making obscene phone calls. On 13 December 1966, he was discharged with an undesirable discharge by reason of misconduct.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2001 | 2001061180C070421
d. Records show that the applicant was properly notified of intent to separate him under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-206, that he was afforded the opportunity to have his case considered by a board of officers and to be represented by counsel, that his case was heard by a board of officers, and that only after receiving the recommendations of the board of officers, did the appropriate separation authority direct the applicant’s discharge. The Board considered the applicant’s...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080012723
The applicant's records show that he enlisted in the Regular Army for a period of 2 years on 1 May 1970. Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 3-7b, 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.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090007878
The applicant requests, in effect, to have his records corrected to change his under honorable conditions discharge to a medical discharge. On 29 January 1964, the applicant's commander submitted a recommendation, with 10 enclosures, that the applicant be discharged under the provisions of paragraph 13f of Army Regulation 635-206 (Personnel Separations Enlisted Personnel) by reason of fraudulent enlistment. The evidence of record shows the applicant was recommended for discharge by...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2013 | 20130019195
On 8 September 1961, the applicant's chain of command considered the applicant's statement indicating he had two dependents at the time of his enlistment. On 26 September 1961, consistent with the chain of command's recommendations, the separation authority approved the discharge action and ordered the applicant discharged in accordance with paragraph 13g of Army Regulation 635-206 by reason of fraudulent enlistment with the issuance of an under honorable conditions (general) discharge. ...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140013981
On 9 February 1967, the applicant's immediate commander recommended the applicant's discharge from military service under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-206 (Personnel Separations - Discharge - Misconduct (Fraudulent Entry, Conviction by Civil Court, and Absence Without Leave or Desertion). b. Paragraph 10n, Army Regulation 601-210 (Qualifications and Procedures for Processing Applicants for Enlistment and Reenlistment in the RA) stated that personnel separated from their last period...