| Mr. Carl W. S. Chun | Director | |
| Mr. Jessie B. Strickland | Analyst |
| Ms. Karol A. Kennedy | Chairperson | |
| Mr. Thomas A. Pagan | Member | |
| Ms. Barbara J. Lutz | Member |
APPLICANT REQUESTS: That the undesirable discharge of her deceased husband, a former service member (FSM) be upgraded to a more favorable discharge.
APPLICANT STATES: That the FSM was under great stress from marital difficulties and while at home he observed his unfaithful wife with another man in their home. She goes on to state that when he returned to base, he argued with and struck an officer due to the stress he was under. She goes on to state that he was burned by Agent Orange in Vietnam and developed skin sores and cancer as a result of having answered his country’s call to service.
EVIDENCE OF RECORD: The FSM's military records show:
He was born in Evansville, Indiana, on 25 December 1949 and was inducted in Louisville, Kentucky, on 25 November 1970. At the time of his induction, he indicated that he was married with one child as a dependent and did not live with his wife. He listed his parents as deceased and named his brother as his next of kin. He was transferred to Fort Knox, Kentucky, to undergo his basic combat training (BCT).
He commenced his 8 weeks of BCT on 8 December 1970 and went absent without leave on 1 February 1971. He remained absent until he was apprehended by civil authorities in Yuma, Arizona, on 10 April 1972. He was returned to military control at Fort McArthur, California, and was subsequently transferred to Fort Ord, California, where charges were preferred against him for the AWOL offense.
On 22 June 1972, after consulting with counsel, the FSM submitted a request for discharge for the good of the service, under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 10, in lieu of trial by court-martial. In his request he indicated that he was making the request of his own free will, without coercion from anyone and that he was aware of the implications attached to his request. He also acknowledged that he understood that he could receive a discharge under other than honorable conditions and that he might be deprived of all benefits as a result of such a discharge. He further elected to submit a statement in his own behalf, whereas he asserted that he was experiencing marital and financial problems and simply could not adjust to military life. He contended that he would rather be terminated from the Army so he could go back to civilian life and the job he had waiting for him.
The appropriate authority (a major general) approved his request on 19 July 1972 and directed that he be issued an Undesirable Discharge Certificate.
Accordingly, he was discharged under other than honorable conditions on 24 July 1972, under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 10, in lieu of trial by court-martial. He had served 3 months and 1 day of total active service and had 209 days of lost time due to AWOL. He was still a trainee when he was discharged.
There is no indication in the available records to show that he 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 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel. Chapter 10 of the 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 at any time after charges have been preferred, submit a voluntary request for discharge for the good of the service in lieu of trial by court-martial. A condition of submitting such a request is that the individual concerned must indicate that they have been briefed and understand the consequences of such a request as well as the discharge they might receive. A discharge under other than honorable conditions was at that time and is still 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 FSM’s voluntary request for separation under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 10, for the good of the service, to avoid trial by court-martial, was administratively correct and in conformance with applicable regulations.
2. Accordingly, the type of discharge directed and the reasons therefore were appropriate under the circumstances.
3. After being afforded the opportunity to assert his innocence before a trial by court-martial, he voluntarily requested a discharge for the good of the service in hopes of avoiding a punitive discharge and having a felony conviction on his records. While he may have later decided that he made the wrong choice, the Board finds no basis to direct a change at this late date, especially considering the length of his absence during such a short period of time.
4. The applicant’s contentions regarding the facts and circumstances surrounding the FSM’s separation and service have been noted by the Board. However, they are not supported by the evidence of record.
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. While the Board offers it’s condolences to the applicant for her loss, the Board finds that there is not sufficiently mitigating evidence in the FSM’s case to warrant an upgrade of a duly constituted discharge.
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
___kak__ __tap____ __bjl____ DENY APPLICATION
| CASE ID | AR2002075057 |
| SUFFIX | |
| RECON | YYYYMMDD |
| DATE BOARDED | 2002/10/29 |
| TYPE OF DISCHARGE | UD |
| DATE OF DISCHARGE | 1972/07/24 |
| DISCHARGE AUTHORITY | AR635-200/ch10 |
| DISCHARGE REASON | Gd of svc |
| BOARD DECISION | DENY |
| REVIEW AUTHORITY | |
| ISSUES 1. 689 | 144.7000/a70.00 |
| 2. | |
| 3. | |
| 4. | |
| 5. | |
| 6. |
ARMY | BCMR | CY2004 | 2004100465C070208
Linda M. Barker | |Member | The Board considered the following evidence: Exhibit A - Application for correction of military records. The applicant requests that the undesirable discharge of her deceased husband, a former service member (FSM) be upgraded to honorable. There is no indication in the available records to show that he ever applied to the Army Discharge Review Board for an upgrade of his discharge within that board's 15-year statute of limitations.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2005 | 20050001537C070206
Randolph J. Fleming | |Member | The Board considered the following evidence: Exhibit A - Application for correction of military records. THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE: 1. The applicant requests, in effect, that the undesirable discharge (UD) of her deceased brother by court order, hereafter known as the former service member (FSM), be upgraded from an UD to a general discharge (GD) or a fully honorable discharge (HD).
ARMY | BCMR | CY2005 | 20050001537C070206
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 5 January 2006 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20050001537 I certify that hereinafter is recorded the true and complete record of the proceedings of the Army Board for Correction of Military Records in the case of the above-named individual. THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE: 1. The applicant requests, in effect, that the undesirable discharge (UD) of her deceased brother by court order, hereafter known as the former service member (FSM),...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2004 | 2004101775C070208
The applicant requests that the undesirable discharge of his deceased son, a former service member (FSM) be upgraded to an honorable discharge. The record of nonjudicial punishment (NJP) is unavailable for review by the Board; however, the record does show that he was reduced in pay grade on 21 March 1972. On 18 November 1975, the Army Discharge Review Board denied the FSM’s request for an upgrade of his discharge.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002076030C070215
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 (UD) be upgraded to an honorable discharge (HD). The evidence of record confirms that the applicant’s discharge processing was accomplished in accordance with the applicable regulations in effect at the time and that the type of discharge he received accurately reflects his overall record of service.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2003 | 2003089894C070403
The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein. He was transferred to Fort Ord, California to undergo his basic combat training (BCT). The facts and circumstances surrounding the applicant’s discharge are not present in the available records.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090007063
The applicant requests to continue her deceased husband's (a former service member [FSM]) request to upgrade his undesirable discharge. She states he never got over Vietnam. However, good post service conduct alone is not normally sufficient for upgrading a properly-issued discharge and the ABCMR does not upgrade discharges based solely on the passage of time.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | 20110006391
However, his record contains a DD Form 214 (Report of Separation from Active Duty) which shows he was discharged on 13 December 1973 under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations - Enlisted Personnel), chapter 10, for the good of the service - in lieu of trial by court-martial, with a character of service of under other than honorable conditions, reentry code 4. On 10 November 1977, the FSM was discharged under Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 14, with an honorable...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002081496C070215
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. APPLICANT REQUESTS: That his undesirable discharge be upgraded to an honorable discharge. The Board determined that the applicant’s overall military service did not meet the standards of acceptable conduct and performance of duty for Army personnel sufficient to warrant an honorable discharge.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2006 | 20060007407C070205
The applicant requests that the undesirable discharge of her deceased husband, a former service member (FSM), be upgraded to honorable. She also states that the FSM’s brother was just a cook and got his discharge changed and he did not see what the FSM saw in Vietnam. Chapter 10 of the 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 at any time after charges have been...