Search Decisions

Decision Text

ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002078086C070215
Original file (2002078086C070215.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied
MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION


         IN THE CASE OF:
        


         BOARD DATE: 8 April 2003
         DOCKET NUMBER: AR2002078086

         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.

Mr. Carl W. S. Chun Director
Ms. Rosa M. Chandler Analyst


The following members, a quorum, were present:

Mr. Raymond J. Wagner Chairperson
Ms. Barbara J. Ellis Member
Ms. Linda M. Barker Member

         The Board, established pursuant to authority contained in 10 U.S.C. 1552, convened at the call of the Chairperson on the above date. 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 correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein.

         The Board considered the following evidence:

         Exhibit A - Application for correction of military
records
         Exhibit B - Military Personnel Records (including
         advisory opinion, if any)


APPLICANT REQUESTS: That his undesirable discharge (UD) be upgraded to a fully honorable discharge.

APPLICANT STATES: In essence, that during the hearing process, he was given a choice to either complete his military service obligation or to be separated with the type of discharge that he received. He believes the officers involved in his hearing felt that his service was honorable or they would not have offered him the opportunity to complete his service obligation. The applicant also requests that the copy of the DD Form 214 (Armed Forces of the United States Report of Transfer or Discharge) that he previously submitted be returned.

EVIDENCE OF RECORD: The applicant's military records show:

Prior to the period of service under review, the applicant was inducted into the Army of the United States and he served from 6-11 August 1968. He was honorably separated for immediate reenlistment and issued a DD Form 214.

On 12 August 1968, he reenlisted in the Regular Army for a period of 3 years. He completed basic combat training and advanced individual training and he was awarded military occupational specialty (MOS) 72B (Communications Center Specialist). On 3 March 1969, he was assigned to Vietnam.

On 22 September 1969, the applicant was convicted by a special court-martial of being absent without leave (AWOL) and of being in an off limits area. His sentence included the forfeiture of $100.00 pay per month for 2 months and reduction to pay grade E-3. The court-martial order is not contained in the available record.

On an unknown date in 1969, the applicant was admitted to Ward 9, 3rd Field Hospital, Vietnam. Medical records pertaining to the admission are not available, however, in a statement made during his period of admission, the applicant said that he was being treated for a "genital infection."

A sworn statement made by a first lieutenant, indicates that, at approximately 2215 hours, 2 January 1970, the night noncommissioned officer (NCO) in charge of Ward 9 reported smelling marijuana in the latrine. The lieutenant and the NCO went into the latrine and the odor appeared to be coming from the stall that was occupied by the applicant. The applicant flushed the commode and appeared "perspiring, eyes glassy and his gait slight ataxic." On 4 January 1970, at approximately 1900 hours, the lieutenant observed the applicant concealing something in his left hand while gathered in the hallway with two visitors. The lieutenant approached him and requested to see what he was concealing. The applicant cursed at the lieutenant, then went into the latrine and attempted to flush the concealed object. When the lieutenant attempted to take possession of the object, the applicant grabbed it and returned to the hallway. The lieutenant was neither able to see the object or to take possession of it. The lieutenant called the action officer on duty (AOD) (captain) and the sergeant of the guard. The applicant cursed at the AOD when he arrived and attempted to leave the hospital premises. At 1945 hours, he was escorted back to his hospital ward. At 2000 hours, the applicant approached the lieutenant and said, "Lieutenant, between you and me, better luck next time" and in a threatening manner, he said "If anyone puts anything in my locker, I am coming to see you."

A sworn statement, dated 4 January 1970 that was provided by the AOD indicates that at approximately 1930 hours, he received a call to come to the hospital; that when he arrived he found the applicant extremely unruly and agitated and refusing to go back to Ward 9. The military police were called and the applicant attempted to leave the premises through the back gate of the hospital in a jeep driven by a friend. The gate guards stopped the applicant and he was escorted back to Ward 9. The officers involved in the incident recommended that disciplinary action be taken against him.

On 19 January 1970, the applicant indicated in a statement in support for a request for discharge for the good of the service that he felt his request for discharge should be granted due to the fact that he was hospitalized and suffering from a genital infection; that previously, his infection had been misdiagnosed by medical personnel; and that he was subjected to great pressure which would have been a major cause of any offenses he would have committed. He also stated that he had made a contribution to the Army during this term of service, particularly prior to his arrival in Vietnam; that he had achieved excellent conduct and efficiency ratings up until very recently; and that he believed it would be in his best interest and the best interest of the United States Army for him to be granted this discharge.

On 5 March 1970, the applicant was convicted by a special court-martial of being disrespectful in language towards two commissioned officers and a NCO; of disobeying a lawful order given by a commissioned officer on 4 January 1970; of being AWOL from his unit from 7-8 January 1970, 10-15 January 1970, and from 29 January-28 February 1970. His sentence included confinement at hard labor for 4 months and forfeiture of $492.00 pay per month for 2 months.

On 7 May 1970, a bar to reenlistment was approved against the applicant. The applicant did not appeal the bar.

On 30 June 1970, the unexecuted portion of the applicant's sentence pertaining to confinement at hard labor was suspended until 1 August 1970 unless the suspension was sooner vacated. The applicant was confined from 2 March 1970 to 30 June 1970.

On 4 July 1970, the applicant returned to the United States Army Personnel Center, Oakland, California, for separation processing.

On 4 July 1970, the applicant was discharged. His records do not contain all of the facts and circumstances surrounding the discharge process; however, they do contain a properly constituted DD Form 214 signed by the applicant at the time of discharge. The applicant’s DD Form 214 shows that he was discharged for unfitness with a UD under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-212, due to being involved in frequent incidents of a discreditable nature with civil or military authorities. He had completed 1 year, 5 months, and 14 days of active military service and he had 159 days of lost time due to being AWOL and in confinement.

On 24 June 1977, the Army Discharge Review Board (ADRB) denied the applicant’s request for an upgrade of his discharge under the Department of the Defense Special Discharge Review Program (SDRP).

Army Regulation 635-212, in effect at the time set forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel who were found to be unfit or unsuitable for military service. The regulation further provided, in pertinent part, that service members discharged for unfitness would normally be furnished a UD.

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 available records show that the applicant was discharged for unfitness under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-212. Some of the facts and circumstances surrounding the discharge process are missing, however, the Board presumes regularity in the discharge process. The applicant has provided no information that would indicate the contrary.

3. The quality of the applicant's service was not consistent with the Army's standards for acceptable personal conduct and performance of duty by military personnel. His service record fully supports both the reason for discharge and the characterization of his service. The applicant has provided no evidence to the contrary.

4. The staff of the Board has included copies of the applicant's DD Forms 214 for both periods of service.

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

__rjw___ __bje___ __lmb___ DENY APPLICATION



                  Carl W. S. Chun
                  Director, Army Board for Correction
of Military Records




INDEX

CASE ID AR2002078086
SUFFIX
RECON
DATE BOARDED 20030408
TYPE OF DISCHARGE UD
DATE OF DISCHARGE 19700704
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY AR 635-212 . .
DISCHARGE REASON A51.00
BOARD DECISION (DENY)
REVIEW AUTHORITY
ISSUES 1. 144.5000
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.


Similar Decisions

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002081397C070215

    Original file (2002081397C070215.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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. EVIDENCE OF RECORD : The applicant's military records show: Carl W. S. Chun Director, Army Board for Correction of Military RecordsINDEXCASE IDAR2002081397SUFFIXRECONDATE BOARDED20030710TYPE OF DISCHARGE(UD)DATE OF DISCHARGE19700926DISCHARGE AUTHORITYAR635-212DISCHARGE REASONA51.00BOARD DECISION(DENY)REVIEW AUTHORITYISSUES...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100022609

    Original file (20100022609.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    He provided a DA Form 2823, dated 13 March 1970, which shows an investigator stated that on 11 March 1970 the applicant's father had been advised by the applicant that action had been initiated to discharge him from the Army because of his homosexual problems. 24 April 1970, the appropriate separation authority approved the applicant’s discharge under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-212 for unfitness and directed the issuance of a UD Certificate. As a result, the Board recommends...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2004 | 04101508C070208

    Original file (04101508C070208.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant states that at the time of his disability processing in 1996 the PEB (Physical Evaluation Board) did not have any post surgical records to determine his status and that no HIV test was performed following his surgery or while he was on the TDRL (Temporary Disability Retired List). The applicant provides extracts from his service medical records noting his negative HIV results 1½ months prior to his surgery, a statement from his physician regarding how long the HIV infection...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2003 | 2003090277C070212

    Original file (2003090277C070212.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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: In effect, that his undesirable discharge be upgraded to an honorable discharge. The applicant's chain of command was unanimous in recommending approval of the action and in recommending that the applicant be discharged with an undesirable discharge.

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | 20110022659

    Original file (20110022659.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant provides the following documents: * a letter from the Incarcerated Veterans' Consortium, Inc. * power of attorney * a Standard Form 502 (Clinical Record – Narrative Summary) * police reports * a letter * his DD Form 214 (Armed Forces of the United States Report of Transfer or Discharge) * a page from the Summary of Army Discharge Review Board (ADRB) Hearing * civilian medical records * several character-reference letters CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE: 1. The same letter shows the...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2012 | 20120004592

    Original file (20120004592.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 7 October 1970, the applicant's unit commander recommended that he be required to appear before a board of officers to consider his separation from the Army under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-212. There were no medical records available to the Board and the applicant provided no medical records. Additionally, as stated in Army Regulation 635-212, when separation for unfitness was warranted an undesirable discharge was normally considered appropriate.

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2005 | 20050006103C070206

    Original file (20050006103C070206.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    He contends that he did not perform any medical duties per his MOS. The separation authority approved the recommendation for separation and directed that the applicant be furnished an undesirable discharge. There is no indication in the available records that the applicant applied to the Army Discharge Review Board for a discharge upgrade within its 15-year statute of limitations.

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2004 | 20040002351C070208

    Original file (20040002351C070208.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE: 1. He started using drugs and he did not care about anything, to include himself. On 3 May 1971, the applicant’s unit commander recommended that the applicant's request for discharge under chapter 10 be approved with a UD.

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2004 | 2004106314C070208

    Original file (2004106314C070208.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    The 11 June 1986 letter provided by the applicant is new evidence which will be considered by the Board. On 23 March 1971, the applicant completed a separation physical examination and was found qualified for separation. On 28 June 1971, the applicant was discharged, with an undesirable discharge, under other than honorable conditions, in pay grade E-1, under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-212 for unfitness.

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2013 | 20130018280

    Original file (20130018280.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    He recommended the applicant's discharge under Army Regulation 635-206. The evidence of record shows the applicant underwent a psychiatric evaluation on 26 May 1970 for several "nervous breakdowns." At the time the applicant stated that the only solution was a discharge from Army and that he would go AWOL or insane if he was not discharged.