| Mr. Carl W. S. Chun | Director | |
| Ms. Rosa M. Chandler | Analyst |
| Mr. Raymond V. O'Connor, Jr. | Chairperson | |
| Ms. Barbara J. Ellis | Member | |
| Mr. Frank C. Jones, II | Member |
APPLICANT REQUESTS: That his Bad Conduct Discharge (BCD) be changed to show that he was separated as a result of an entry-level status (ELS) separation.
APPLICANT STATES: That he believes that he would not have received the same type of discharge under current standards.
EVIDENCE OF RECORD: The applicant's military records show:
That as a civilian minor, he was convicted of petty larceny, of illegal possession of alcohol, and, on two occasions, of misappropriation of an automobile. On 27 March 1968, he was granted a moral waiver for these offenses and, on 3 June 1968, he was inducted into the Army of the United States for 2 years.
The applicant took Basic Combat Training (BCT) and Advanced Individual Training (AIT) at Fort Dix, New Jersey, from on/about 10 June 1968 to on/about 27 September 1968. The record shows that he was absent without leave from his training unit from 25 June - 7 July 1968 and from 31 August - 3 September 1968; there is no indication that he was ever punished for these offenses.
The applicant successfully completed all required military training, was awarded military occupational specialty (MOS) 94B, Cook, and was assigned to Fort Carson, Colorado, as his first permanent duty assignment. He arrived at Fort Carson on/about 11 October 1968.
On 22 January 1969, the applicant accepted nonjudicial punishment (NJP) under the provisions of Article 15, Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ), for being AWOL from 21-31 December 1968. His punishment included the forfeiture of $23.00 pay per month for 1 month and 14 days of extra duty and restriction.
The applicant went AWOL again for a total of 329 days on three separate occasions from 17 April - 28 May 1969, 17 June - 1 November 1969, and from 3 January - 2 June 1970. Upon his return to military control at Fort Devens, Massachusetts, he was placed in pre-trial confinement and court-martial charges were preferred against him.
On 26 August 1970, the applicant was convicted by a general court-martial of the above AWOL charges. He was sentenced to forfeiture of $80.00 pay per month for 10 months, to confinement at hard labor for 10 months, reduction from pay grade E-2 to pay grade E-1, and to be separated with a Dishonorable Discharge (DD).
The applicant served his sentence to confinement at the United States Disciplinary Barracks (USDB), Fort Leavenworth, Kansas. On 18 December 1970, the Secretary of the Army remitted the unexecuted portion of his sentence to confinement, effective 28 January 1971, and modified that portion of the sentence adjudging a DD to provide for separation with a BCD. The record of trial was forwarded to the United States Army Court of Military Review for appellate review. On 28 January 1971, he was placed in an excess leave status pending the completion of the appellate review.
On 6 November 1970, the United States Court of Military Review affirmed the findings and the sentence and ordered the BCD to be duly executed. On 28 January 1971, the United States Court of Military Appeals denied the applicant's petition for grant of review.
The applicant's DD Form 214 show that, on 2 March 1971, he was discharged in absentia under the provisions of chapter 3, Army Regulation 635-200 with a BCD. He had completed 1 year, 1 month and 25 days of creditable active military service. He also had 584 days of lost time due to being AWOL and in military confinement before and subsequent to his normal expiration of term of service date.
Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel. Chapter 3, paragraph 3-11, provides that a soldier will be given a DD or BCD pursuant only to an approved sentence of a general or special court-martial. The appellate review must be completed and the affirmed sentence ordered duly executed.
Court-martial convictions stand as adjudged or modified by appeal through the judicial process. In accordance with Title 10, United States Code, Section
1552, the authority under which this Board acts, the ABCMR is empowered to change the severity of the sentence imposed in the court-martial process only if clemency is determined to be appropriate. Clemency is an act of mercy, or instance of leniency, to moderate the severity of the punishment imposed.
Under current standards, chapter 11, Army Regulation 635-200 governs the separation of enlisted personnel while still in an entry-level status during their initial 180 days of service. The policy applies to soldiers who have demonstrated that they are not qualified for retention because they cannot meet the minimum standards prescribed for successful completion of training because of lack of aptitude, ability, motivation or self-discipline. These soldiers are given an uncharacterized discharge and, when discharged under the provisions of chapter 11, are discharged by reason of entry-level status performance and conduct. Soldiers who commit misconduct while in an entry-level status may be subjected to nonjudicial or judicial action and separation for misconduct.
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 committed serious military offenses. Trial by court-martial was warranted by the gravity of the offenses charged. Conviction and discharge were effected in accordance with applicable law and regulations and the discharge appropriately characterizes the misconduct for which the applicant was convicted.
3. The applicant successfully completed all of his training requirements and he served in an active duty status for more than a year; he was not an entry-level status soldier.
4. The applicant has provided no evidence to suggest that, given the same set of circumstances under current standards, he would have received a discharge that was less severe than the one he received.
5. In view of the foregoing, there is no basis for granting the applicant clemency.
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
__rvo___ __bje___ __fcj___ DENY APPLICATION
| CASE ID | AR2002081154 |
| SUFFIX | |
| RECON | |
| DATE BOARDED | 20030904 |
| TYPE OF DISCHARGE | BCD |
| DATE OF DISCHARGE | 19710302 |
| DISCHARGE AUTHORITY | AR635-200, Chap 11 |
| DISCHARGE REASON | A68.00 |
| BOARD DECISION | (DENY) |
| REVIEW AUTHORITY | |
| ISSUES 1. | 144.6800 |
| 2. | |
| 3. | |
| 4. | |
| 5. | |
| 6. |
ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140003526
On 17 January 1978, the applicant applied to the Army Discharge Review Board for an upgrade of his discharge. On 12 February 1979, officials at RCPAC notified the applicant he should have received a general discharge on 22 May 1972 and he was provided a General Discharge Certificate and a DD Form 214 showing he was discharged under honorable conditions under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, due to separation for other good and sufficient reasons as determined by Secretarial...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100020899
IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 1 March 2011 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20100020899 THE BOARD CONSIDERED THE FOLLOWING EVIDENCE: 1. On 28 April 1971, he was discharged under the provisions of chapter 2, Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations Enlisted Separations), for Other Than Desertion (Court-Martial), with a BCD, in pay grade E-1. Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 3-7b, stated a general discharge was a separation from the Army under honorable conditions.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2012 | 20120004433
The applicant requests an upgrade of his bad conduct discharge (BCD) to an honorable discharge. A DD Form 458 (Charge Sheet), dated 28 July 1971, was prepared by the Commander, Troop D, 4th Squadron, 12th Cavalry, Fort Carson, CO, showing the applicant was charged with one specification of wrongfully dispersing by selling to another Soldier a controlled drug (amphetamine) on or about 21 July 1971. His sentence and conviction were affirmed and the BCD was ordered executed.
ARMY | BCMR | CY1997 | 9710634C070209
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 10 July 1968 the applicant was inducted into the Army of the United States for 2 years at the age of 19. The evidence of record and the independent evidence submitted by the applicant does not support his contentions that his legal counsel was inadequate or that his chain of command failed to respond to...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2006 | 20060007452C070205
The applicant requests that his bad conduct discharge (BCD), characterized as under other than honorable conditions (UOTHC), be upgraded. 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 | CY2011 | 20110021986
He departed Vietnam in the pay grade of E-4 on 5 May 1969 for assignment to Fort Carson, Colorado. There is no evidence in the available records to show that he applied to the Army Discharge Review Board for an upgrade of his discharge within that boards 15-year statute of limitations. Accordingly, his punishment was not disproportionate to the offenses for which he was convicted and he has failed to show sufficient evidence or reasons to warrant an upgrade of his discharge based on clemency.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | 20110012425
IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 1 March 2012 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20110012425 THE BOARD CONSIDERED THE FOLLOWING EVIDENCE: 1. The applicant requests an upgrade of his bad conduct discharge (BCD) to a general discharge. Chapter 11 states a Soldier will be given a bad conduct discharge pursuant only to an approved sentence of a general or special court-martial and the appellate review must be completed and the affirmed sentence ordered duly executed.
ARMY | BCMR | CY1997 | 9710634
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...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090004239
The applicant requests, in effect, that his bad conduct discharge (BCD) be upgraded to a general discharge under honorable conditions discharge; and that he be awarded the Purple Heart (PH). The applicant's record shows that he enlisted in the Regular Army and entered active duty on 16 February 1967. It states, in pertinent part, that in order to support award of the PH there must be evidence that the wound for which the award is being made was received as a result of enemy action; that...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | 20110003047
This provision of law also allows the Army Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR) to excuse an applicants failure to timely file within the 3-year statute of limitations if the ABCMR determines it would be in the interest of justice to do so. Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 3-7a, states an honorable discharge was a separation with honor. The evidence of record shows the applicant reenlisted in the RA on 17 August 1972.