| Mr. Carl W. S. Chun | Director | |
| Mr. W. W. Osborn, Jr. | Analyst |
| Mr. Melvin H. Meyer | Chairperson | ||
| Mr. Curtis L. Greenway | Member | ||
| Mr. Ronald J. Weaver | Member |
APPLICANT REQUESTS: That his discharge be upgraded.
APPLICANT STATES: That when he asked for leave he was simply told to, "go if you have to," so he left and became absent without leave (AWOL). His wife was pregnant and having a difficult time. She needed him to be with her.
Since his discharge, he has been a productive member of society.
EVIDENCE OF RECORD: The applicant's military records show:
He enlisted and entered active duty on 22 September 1972. He completed basic and advanced individual training as a field wireman with excellent conduct and efficiency ratings.
The applicant received nonjudicial punishment (NJP) under Article 15, Uniform Code of Military Justice on 30 November 1973 for AWOL from 8 to 16 November 1973. The punishment consisted of restriction and extra duty for 25 days, reduction to pay grade E-2 (suspended for 60 days) and forfeiture of $100.00 per month for 1 month.
A 20 March 1974 summary court-martial convicted him of AWOL from 12 December 1973 to 7 January 1974 and sentenced him to forfeit $150.00 pay per month for 1 month and reduction to pay grade E-1. The convening authority suspended the reduction for 60 days.
He received another NJP and another suspended reduction to pay grade E-2 on 13 May 1974. That suspension was subsequently vacated.
On 8 June 1974 the applicant received nonjudicial punishment for AWOL from 24 to 28 May 1974. The punishment included correctional custody for 30 days.
The applicant escaped from correctional custody and was AWOL from14 July to 21 October 1974.
A 7 November 1974 physical examination found him qualified for separation. The applicant was fully alert and oriented at an 8 January 1975 mental status evaluation. He displayed a level mood, clear thinking, normal thought content and good memory. There was no significant mental illness. He was mentally responsible, able to distinguish right from wrong and to adhere to the right. He had the mental capacity to understand and participate in board proceedings. He met medical retention standards.
On 14 January 1975 the applicant was notified of recommended separation for unfitness. He consulted with counsel and waived his rights to have a board of officers consider his case and to be represented by counsel. He acknowledged that he understood that he could expect to encounter substantial prejudice in civilian life because of the less than honorable discharge and that he would forfeit all rights administered by Veterans Affairs and might lose other benefits under Federal and state laws.
The separation authority approved the recommendation and directed that an undesirable discharge be issued. On 10 February 1975 the applicant was separated under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 13-5a(1) for unfitness. He had 1 year, 11 months and 19 days of creditable service and 150 days lost time.
Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the policy and prescribes the procedures for administrative separation of enlisted personnel. Chapter 13, in effect at that time, applied to separation for unfitness and unsuitability. Paragraph 13-5(a)1 provided for the separation for unfitness, which included frequent incidents of a discreditable nature. When separation for unfitness was warranted an undesirable discharge was 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 discharge proceedings were conducted in accordance with law and regulations applicable at the time. The character of the discharge is commensurate with the applicant's overall record of military service.
2. The applicant's unsubstantiated contentions fail to demonstrate an injustice in the discharge.
3. 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.
4. 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
MHM___ __CLG__ __RJW ___ DENY APPLICATION
| CASE ID | AR2002075367 |
| SUFFIX | |
| RECON | |
| 20030204 | |
| TYPE OF DISCHARGE | UD |
| DATE OF DISCHARGE | 19750210 |
| DISCHARGE AUTHORITY | AR635-200, ch 13 . . . . . |
| DISCHARGE REASON | |
| BOARD DECISION | (NC, GRANT , DENY, GRANT PLUS) |
| REVIEW AUTHORITY | |
| ISSUES 1. | |
| 2. | |
| 3. | |
| 4. | |
| 5. | |
| 6. |
ARMY | BCMR | CY2001 | 2001064026C070421
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: The character of the discharge was lenient considering the applicant's overall record of military service.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2005 | 20050016029C070206
On the date of his discharge, the applicant had completed 2 years and 6 months total active military service, with 125 days lost due to absence without leave and confinement. When authorized, it is issued to a Soldier whose military record is satisfactory but not sufficiently meritorious to warrant an honorable discharge. Records show the applicant exhausted his administrative remedies in this case when his case was last reviewed by the ADRB on 16 March 1977.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2005 | 20050008804C070206
On 30 November 1972, while serving in the pay grade of E-4, he reenlisted for a period of 3 years and assignment to Fort Meade, Maryland. The U.S. Court of Appeals, observing that applicants to the Army Discharge Review Board (ADRB) are by statute allowed 15 years to apply there, and that this Board's exhaustion requirement (Army Regulation 15-185, paragraph 2-8), effectively shortens that filing period, has determined that the 3 year limit on filing to the Army Board for Correction of...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2003 | 2003088672C070403
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. On 23 June 1976, the separation authority approved the recommendation for separation and directed that the applicant be furnished an undesirable discharge. The Board reviewed the applicant's record of service which included four nonjudicial punishments, one civil conviction for Grand Larceny and 23 days of lost time and...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2006 | AR20060013877C071029
THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE: 1. The applicant requests, in effect, that his undesirable discharge, be upgraded to an honorable discharge. A review of the available records fails to show that the applicant applied to the Army Discharge Review Board for an upgrade of his discharge within that board's 15-year statute of limitations.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090015132
On 23 December 1975, the applicants immediate commander notified the applicant of his intent to initiate elimination from the Army under the provisions of chapter 13 of Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations Enlisted Personnel) by reason of unfitness. On 9 February 1976, the separation authority approved the recommendation to discharge the applicant and directed he be discharged under the provisions of paragraph 13-5 of Army Regulation 635-200 by reason of unfitness and that he...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002080332C070215
The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein. On 26 January 1976, the applicant's commander advised the applicant of his rights and preferred charges against him for the AWOL offense. 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.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2003 | 2003084607C070212
The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein. On 14 April 1976, after consulting with counsel, the applicant submitted a request for discharge for the good of the service under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 10. The Board reviewed the applicant’s record of service which included four nonjudicial punishments, two special court-martial convictions, and 280 days of lost time and determined that his...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2005 | 20050000625C070206
When authorized, it is issued to a Soldier whose military record is satisfactory but not sufficiently meritorious to warrant an honorable discharge. Although the applicant contends that his record of nonjudicial punishments indicate only minor offenses, evidence of record shows nonjudicial punishment was imposed against him on six occasions for various infractions which include larceny and assault. The applicant’s record of service included six nonjudicial punishments, two special...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2003 | 2003090324C070212
EVIDENCE OF RECORD : The applicant's military records show: On 13 August 1975, the applicant submitted a request to the Army Discharge Review Board for upgrade of his undesirable discharge to an honorable discharge. The character of the discharge is commensurate with the applicant's overall record of military service which includes over 200 days of AWOL, at least five non-judicial punishments, and one court martial conviction in a period of less than three years.