| Mr. Carl W. S. Chun | Director | |
| Mrs. Judy Blanchard-Miller | Analyst |
| Ms. JoAnn H. Langston | Chairperson | ||
| Mr. Raymond V. O’Connor, Jr. | Member | ||
| Ms. Barbara J. Lutz | Member |
APPLICANT REQUESTS: In effect, that his undesirable discharge (UD) be upgraded to a general discharge under honorable conditions.
APPLICANT STATES: In effect, that he bought the watch from his comrade; he did not steal the watch.
EVIDENCE OF RECORD: The applicant's military records show:
On 12 October 1973, the applicant enlisted in the Regular Army for 2 years. He completed the required training and was awarded military occupational specialty 13B10 (Field Artillery Crewman). The highest grade he achieved was pay grade E-2.
On 27 June and 29 July 1974, court-martial charges were preferred against the applicant of three specifications of failure to repair, of two occasions of disobeying a lawful order, of using provoking words toward a military police and for stealing by means of force a watch from a fellow soldier.
In July 1974, a physical examination found the applicant fit for retention.
On 12 August 1974, after consulting with legal counsel the applicant voluntarily without any coercion requested a discharge under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 10, for the good of the service in lieu of trial by court-martial. The applicant acknowledged, that he understood the elements of the offense charged. The applicant waived further rehabilitation and was advised of the effects of a discharge under other than honorable conditions. He acknowledged that he understood, that he might be deprived of many or all Army and Veterans Administration benefits. He was afforded the opportunity to submit statements in his behalf, but decline to do so.
On 20 August 1974, the company commander, recommended approval of the applicant’s request for discharge under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 10. The commander’s decision was based on the applicant’s reluctance to adjust to military service.
On 11 September 1974, the Commanding General approved the applicant’s request for discharge and directed the issuance of an Undesirable Discharge Certificate. On 21 September 1974, the applicant was discharged, in pay grade
E-1, under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 10, for the good of the service with a UD. He completed 11 months and 10 days of creditable active military service.
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 at any time after the charges have been preferred, submit a request for discharge for the good of the service in lieu of trial by court-martial. An undesirable discharge is normally considered appropriate.
On 18 June 1981, the Army Discharge Review Board denied the applicant's request for an upgrade of his discharge.
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 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.
2. The applicant'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. There is no indication that the request was made under coercion, duress or that his rights were violated in any way.
3. The applicant has submitted neither probative evidence nor a convincing argument in support of the request.
4. Therefore, in view of the foregoing, there is no basis for granting the applicant’s requests.
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
__JHL __ __ RVO _ __BJL __ DENY APPLICATION
| CASE ID | AR2002075119 |
| SUFFIX | |
| RECON | YYYYMMDD |
| DATE BOARDED | 2002/08/22 |
| TYPE OF DISCHARGE | (UD) |
| DATE OF DISCHARGE | 1974/09/21 |
| DISCHARGE AUTHORITY | AR635-200,chapter10 . . . . . |
| DISCHARGE REASON | A70.00 |
| BOARD DECISION | (DENY) |
| REVIEW AUTHORITY | |
| ISSUES 1.144.7000 | |
| 2. | |
| 3. | |
| 4. | |
| 5. | |
| 6. |
ARMY | BCMR | CY1995 | 9509213C070209
The applicant requests that his undesirable discharge (UD), issued as a result of separation in lieu of trial by court-martial under the provisions of chapter 10, Army Regulation (AR) 635-200, for absence without leave (AWOL), be upgraded to honorable. The applicants military record shows that he was an excellent soldier from the time of his enlistment until he went AWOL on 12 March 1974. Chapter 10 of that regulation provides, in pertinent part, that a member who has committed an offense...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2012 | 20120001814
On 15 June 1981, he consulted with legal counsel and voluntarily requested discharge for the good of the service under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations - Enlisted Personnel), chapter 10 due to charges being preferred against him under the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) which authorized the imposition of a bad conduct or dishonorable discharge. Although an honorable or general discharge is authorized, a discharge under other than honorable conditions...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100024787
THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE: 1. The applicant requests that his undesirable discharge be upgraded to a general discharge. On 15 March 1974, the applicant consulted with counsel and voluntarily requested a discharge under the provisions of chapter 10, Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separation - Enlisted Personnel), for the good of the service.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002068441C070402
On 6 March 1975, court-martial charges were preferred against the applicant of being AWOL from 8 October 1974 to 28 February 1975. On 28 April 1975, the applicant was discharged, in pay grade E-1, under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 10, for the good of the service with a UD. On 22 June 1981, the Army Discharge Review Board denied the applicant's request for an upgrade of his discharge.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | 20110004109
The applicant requests that his undesirable discharge be upgraded to an honorable discharge. He goes on to state that he earned the National Defense Service Medal and not only did he complete his training, he served 9 months and 19 days overseas. There is no evidence in the available records to show that he ever applied to the Army Discharge Review Board for an upgrade of his discharge within that boards 15-year statute of limitations.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140005244
The applicant requests reconsideration of his previous request for an upgrade of his general discharge to an honorable discharge. The ABCMR recommended his records be corrected to show he was separated with a general discharge on 22 October 1973 in lieu of the UD which was issued. On 6 October 1977, he was provided a DD Form 214 (Report of Separation from Active Duty) showing his character of service as under honorable conditions (general).
ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | 20110021062
He provides: * DD Form 149 (Application for Correction of Military Record or Naval Record Under the Provisions of Title 10, U.S. Code, Section 1552) * DD Form 214 (Report of Separation from Active Duty) * Report of Roentgenological Examination * Social Security Award Certificate * Office of the Secretary of Army (OSA) Form 172 (Army Council of Review Boards, Case Report and Directive) CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE: 1. The applicant acknowledged: a. he was making the request of his own free will...
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 | CY2007 | 20070006842C071029
On 15 August 1974, the appropriate authority approved the request and directed the applicant be issued an Undesirable Discharge Certificate. On 16 August 1974, the applicant was discharged with an undesirable discharge and a characterization of service of under other than honorable conditions, in pay grade E-1, under the provisions of Army Regulation 635- 200, chapter 10, discharge in lieu of trial by court-martial. Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2003 | 2003085034C070212
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 determined that insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate the existence of probable material error or injustice. The applicant requests...