| Mr. Carl W. S. Chun | Director | |
| Mr. William Blakely | Analyst |
| Mr. John N. Slone | Chairperson | ||
| Mr. Donald P. Hupman, Jr. | Member | ||
| Mr. William D. Powers | Member |
APPLICANT REQUESTS: In effect, that his undesirable discharge (UD) be upgraded to a general, under honorable conditions discharge (GD).
APPLICANT STATES: In effect, that he went absent without leave (AWOL) in August 1969, and got into trouble with civilian authorities and went to jail. He thought the military had been notified, and he did not learn until much later that he was considered AWOL. He claims that he was young at the time and did not understand what was happening. In support of his application, he submits a copy of his separation document (DD Form 214).
EVIDENCE OF RECORD: The applicant's military records show:
On 11 October 1968, the applicant was inducted into the Army. His records document no acts of valor, significant achievement, or service warranting special recognition, and the highest rank he attained on active duty was private/E-2.
The applicant completed basic combat and advanced individual training (AIT). Upon successful completion of his training, he was awarded military occupation specialty 51B (Carpenter). On 21 April 1969, while attending AIT, the applicant was convicted by a special court-martial of being AWOL from 2 January through 20 March 1969.
The applicant was reassigned to the Republic of Vietnam (RVN) and was instructed to report to the US Army Overseas Replacement Station, Oakland, California, for movement to the RVN on 12 August 1969. He failed to report for his movement date and was declared AWOL. On 17 January 1972, he returned to military control at the US Army Personnel Control Facility, Fort Carson, Colorado. The applicant again went AWOL from 1 February to 19 May 1972.
On 22 May 1972, court-martial charges were preferred against the applicant for the following two periods of AWOL: 12 August 1969 to 17 January 1972; and 1 February to 19 May 1972. After consulting with legal counsel and being advised of the basis for the contemplated trial by court-martial, the maximum allowable punishment, and the possible effects of an UD, the applicant voluntarily requested to be discharged for the good of the service/in lieu of trial by
court-martial, under the provisions of chapter 10, Army Regulation 635-200.
The appropriate authority approved the applicant’s request for discharge, under the provisions of chapter 10, Army Regulation 635-200, for the good of the service/in lieu of trial by court-martial, and directed that he receive an UD. On
13 July 1972, the applicant was discharged accordingly. At the time of his discharge, he had completed a total of 11 months and 17 days of creditable active military service.
On 1 May 1979, the Army Discharge Review Board determined that the applicant’s discharge was proper and equitable, and it denied his request for an upgrade to his discharge.
Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel. Chapter 10 of that regulation provides, in pertinent part, that a member who has committed an offense or offenses for which the authorized punishment includes a punitive discharge may submit a request for discharge for the good of the service in lieu of trial by court-martial. The request may be submitted at any time after court-martial charges have been preferred. Although an honorable or general discharge is authorized, a discharge under other than honorable conditions is 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, and it is concluded:
1. The Board notes the applicant’s contention that his being unaware and young were mitigating factors in the AWOL related misconduct that ultimately resulted in his discharge. However, it finds this claim is insufficiently mitigating to warrant the requested relief.
2. The evidence of record shows the applicant was charged with the commission of multiple offenses punishable under the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) with a punitive discharge. The Board notes that, after consulting with defense counsel, the applicant voluntarily, and in writing, requested separation from the Army in lieu of trial by court-martial. In doing so, he admitted guilt to the stipulated offenses under the UCMJ.
3. The Board is satisfied that all requirements of law and regulation were met and the rights of the applicant were fully protected throughout the separation process, and that the applicant’s discharge accurately reflects his overall record of service.
4. 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.
5. 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
__JNS__ __DPH___ __WDP__ DENY APPLICATION
| CASE ID | AR2002074310 |
| SUFFIX | |
| RECON | YYYYMMDD |
| DATE BOARDED | 2002/09/12 |
| TYPE OF DISCHARGE | UOTHC |
| DATE OF DISCHARGE | 19720713 |
| DISCHARGE AUTHORITY | AR 635-200 Ch 10. . . . . |
| DISCHARGE REASON | In Lieu of trial by CM |
| BOARD DECISION | DENY |
| REVIEW AUTHORITY | |
| ISSUES 1. | 144.7000 |
| 2. | 144.033 |
| 3. | |
| 4. | |
| 5. | |
| 6. |
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002072744C070403
APPLICANT STATES : In effect, that he did not receive his orders for reassignment to his next duty station. EVIDENCE OF RECORD : The applicant's military records show: On 30 April 1971, the applicant was discharged accordingly.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2003 | 2003091698C070212
EVIDENCE OF RECORD: The applicant's military records show: On 20 June 1969, he enlisted in the Regular Army for 3 years. As a result, it is determined that an upgrade to the applicant’s discharge would not be appropriate at this time. BOARD VOTE: ________ ________ ________ GRANT ________ ________ ________ GRANT FORMAL HEARING ____CLG__ __EL___ __LB__ DENY APPLICATION Carl W. S. Chun Director, Army Board for Correction of Military Records INDEX |CASE ID |AR200.091698 | |SUFFIX | | |RECON |...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2004 | 20040003412C070208
The applicant requests, in effect, that his undesirable discharge (UD) be upgraded to an honorable discharge (HD). The applicant’s request for discharge was approved and on 16 February 1970, he was separated from active duty with an UD. 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 | CY2001 | 2001058577C070421
The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein. APPLICANT REQUESTS: In effect, that his undesirable discharge be upgraded to a general discharge. He did not complete his airborne training and received orders transferring him to Fort Lewis, Washington with a report date of 25 April 1971.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002074844C070403
EVIDENCE OF RECORD : The applicant's military records show: On 13 May 1974, the applicant was discharged accordingly. In December 1970, long before the applicant was returned to military control after being found by the FBI in 1974, the unit commander from his unit in the RVN sent a letter to his mother informing her of his AWOL status.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2001 | 2001059206C070421
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. Chapter 10 of that regulation provides, in pertinent part, that a member who has committed an offense or offenses for which the authorized punishment includes a punitive discharge may submit a request for discharge for the good of the service in lieu of trial by court-martial. Army policy states that although an honorable or...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2001 | 2001058729C070421
The applicant requests, in effect, that his general, under honorable conditions discharge (GD) be upgraded to an honorable discharge (HD). The counselor also confirms that the applicant now suffers from a Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) that is well documented in VA records and has received medication and counseling for this condition for many years. That all of the Department of the Army records related to this case be corrected by showing that this Board affirms the SDRB upgrade of...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2005 | 20050017556C070206
Ernestine R. Fields | |Member | The Board considered the following evidence: Exhibit A - Application for correction of military records. On 14 April 1972, the separation authority approved the applicant's request for discharge and directed that he receive an UD. The applicant's honorable service is documented in the DD Form 214 he was issued on 30 March 1971, at the time of his reenlistment.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002071810C070403
The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein. APPLICANT REQUESTS: That his undesirable discharge be upgraded to a more favorable discharge. The commanding general approved his request on 3 August 1973 and directed that he be furnished an Undesirable Discharge Certificate.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002079813C070215
The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein. EVIDENCE OF RECORD : The applicant's military records show: On 23 December 1971, the applicant was discharged accordingly.