| Mr. Carl W. S. Chun | Director | |
| Mr. G. E. Vandenberg | Analyst |
| Mr. Samuel A. Crumpler | Chairperson | |
| Ms. Shirley L. Powell | Member | |
| Mr. John T. Meixell | Member |
APPLICANT REQUESTS: His discharge be upgraded.
APPLICANT STATES: In effect, he was told at his court-martial that his discharge would automatically be upgraded after 6 months.
EVIDENCE OF RECORD: The applicant's military records show that:
The applicant entered active duty on 13 April 1964. He completed basic combat training and advanced individual training with award of the military occupational specialty (MOS) 410 (Ammunitions Helper). He reenlisted on 11 May 1965.
The applicant received nonjudicial punishment (NJP) under Article 15, Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) on 19 February 1965, for stealing food; 11 December 1965 for absence from his place of duty (AAPD), and on 23 December 1965 for failure to report for guard mount and breaking restriction; and on 27 January 1966, for AAPD. On 10 January 1966, he was convicted by a summary court-martial of AWOL (absent without leave) and AAPD (absent from his appointed place of duty).
He reported to Vietnam, on 8 April 1966, for duty with the 550th Ordnance Detachment. On 6 July 1966, he received his fifth NJP, for violating a lawful order. He returned to the United States on 3 April 1967, reported in and was advanced to pay grade E-4. He received two more NJPs for short AWOLs.
On 11 December 1967 a special court-martial found the applicant guilty of 42 days AWOL. His sentence included confinement for 6 months. His command initiated elimination proceedings on 12 December 1967.
On 19 December 1967, the applicant was afforded a psychiatric evaluation, which produced a diagnosis of passive aggressive personality disorder with a long history of non-adjustment to social situations. He was cleared for any administrative decision or action deemed appropriate by his command.
On 21 December 1967, after consulting with counsel and being advised of his rights and options, the applicant acknowledged he had been advised of and understood his rights under the Uniform Code of Military Justice, that he could receive an undesirable discharge (UD) which would deprive him of many or all of his benefits as a veteran and that he could expect to experience substantial prejudice in civilian life if he received a UD. He waived his rights to have his case considered by a board of officers, to appear personally before a board of officers, and to make a personal statement or to be represented by counsel.
The discharge authority approved the discharge recommendation and directed that the applicant be discharged for unfitness and furnished an undesirable discharge.
The applicant was discharged with an UD on 7 February 1968 under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-212. His DD Form 214 (Report of Transfer or Discharge) shows he had 3 years, 5 months, and 17 days creditable service with 110 days lost due to AWOL or incarceration.
Army Regulation 635-212, in effect at the time, set forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel. Paragraph 6a(1) of the regulation provided, in pertinent part, that members involved in frequent incidents of a discreditable nature with civil or military authorities were subject to separation for unfitness. 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 and 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. His statement that he was told at his court-martial that his discharge would be automatically upgraded after 6 months is not credible, because he was not discharged by court-martial action. There is not now nor has there ever been an automatic upgrade program or provision.
3. The applicant has provided no valid arguments or documentation to support his request for an upgrade of his discharge.
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.
| CASE ID | AR2002079819 |
| SUFFIX | |
| RECON | |
| DATE BOARDED | 20030610 |
| TYPE OF DISCHARGE | |
| DATE OF DISCHARGE | |
| DISCHARGE AUTHORITY | |
| DISCHARGE REASON | |
| BOARD DECISION | DENY |
| REVIEW AUTHORITY | |
| ISSUES 1. | Upgrade |
| 2. | |
| 3. | |
| 4. | |
| 5. | |
| 6. |
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002074782C070403
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: Further, the applicant’s Military Personnel Records Jacket (MPRJ) contains no evidence showing that he applied for or was denied a hardship discharge.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2005 | 20050001272C070206
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 22 November 2005 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20050001272 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. On 17 May 1967, he was discharged with an undesirable discharge and a characterization of service as under conditions other than honorable after completing 8 months and 25 days of creditable active service. The U.S....
ARMY | BCMR | CY2005 | 20050001272C070206
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 22 November 2005 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20050001272 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. On 12 January 1978, the ADRB reviewed and denied the applicant's request for upgrade. The U.S. Court of Appeals, observing that applicants to the Army Discharge Review Board (ADRB) are by statute allowed 15 years to...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2006 | 20060010188C080410
The applicant requests that his records be corrected by upgrading his discharge. On 22 November 1967, the applicant was discharged under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-212 for unfitness with an undesirable discharge. However, the recommendation for separation submitted by the applicant's commander states that a medical examination was included with his separation packet.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2001 | 2001058668C070421
The separation action was approved by the appropriate authority, who directed the applicant receive an UD and on 15 May 1968, the applicant was discharged from the Army accordingly. On 11 December 1981, the Army Discharge Review Board denied the applicant’s request for an upgrade to his discharge after having determined that the discharge was proper and equitable. DISCUSSION : Considering all the evidence, allegations, and information presented by the applicant, together with the evidence...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | 20110000748
Title 10, U.S. Code, section 1552(b), provides that applications for correction of military records must be filed within 3 years after discovery of the alleged error or injustice. On 28 January 1982, the Army Discharge Review Board denied the applicant's request to upgrade his discharge. The applicant states he was having emotional problems after returning from Vietnam and was AWOL after the Army psychiatrists couldn't help him.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2001 | 2001060046C070421
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 28 December 1967, the applicant’s commander submitted a recommendation to separate the applicant from the service under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-212 for unsuitability.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2003 | 2003090241C070212
The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein. This program, known as the DOD Discharge Review Program (Special) (SDRP) required, in the absence of compelling reasons to the contrary, that a discharge upgrade to either honorable or general be issued in the case of any individual who had either completed a normal tour of duty in Southeast Asia, been wounded in action, been awarded a military decoration other than a...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002074694C070403
On 3 March 1964, while assigned to Fort Carson, Colorado, the applicant reenlisted in the RA for 6 years in pay grade E-3. SPCM Order Number 15, provided by the applicant, shows that, on 1 August 1966, the appropriate authority determined that the specifications and charges promulgated in SPCM Order Number 26, dated 19 July 1966, did not allege an offense, because it did not contain the words "without proper authority." Specification 2 contains the phrase and indicates that he was charged...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002080764C070215
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: 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: