| Mr. Carl W. S. Chun | Director | |
| Mr. Jessie B. Strickland | Analyst |
| Ms. Margaret K. Patterson | Chairperson | ||
| Mr. Ted S. Kanamine | Member | ||
| Mr. Lawrence Foster | Member |
APPLICANT REQUESTS: That his undesirable discharge be upgraded to an honorable or general discharge.
APPLICANT STATES: That his overall combat service was not given consideration at the time of his discharge.
EVIDENCE OF RECORD: The applicant's military records, though somewhat incomplete, show:
He was inducted in Oklahoma on 21 August 1967 and was transferred to Fort Polk, Louisiana, to undergo his training. While attending his advanced individual training (AIT), he went absent without leave (AWOL) from 2 January to 5 January 1968. The record is silent as to any punishment imposed.
He completed his training and was transferred to Vietnam on 8 March 1968, for duty as a light weapons infantryman. He was advanced to the pay grade of E-4 on 20 June 1968 and his records show he was awarded the Combat Infantryman Badge, the Purple Heart, the Vietnam Service Medal, the Republic of Vietnam Campaign Medal and the Republic of Vietnam Gallantry Cross with Palm Unit Citation for his 6 months of service in Vietnam.
On 31 July 1968, while still in Vietnam, he was granted 30 days of emergency leave due to the death of his brother.
The applicant did not return to his unit after his leave and was reported as AWOL effective 31 August 1968. He remained absent until he was returned to military control at Fort Sill, Oklahoma, on 10 September 1968. Again, the record is silent as to any punishment imposed.
He again went AWOL from 15 September through 16 September and 30 September 1968 through 8 February 1969. He was convicted of the AWOL offenses by a special court-martial on 4 March 1969 and was sentenced to confinement at hard labor for 6 months and a forfeiture of pay.
He again went AWOL on 8 September 1969 and remained absent until he was apprehended and confined by civil authorities on 22 December 1969. He was returned to military control where he was convicted by a special court-martial on 22 January 1970, of the AWOL offense. He was sentenced to confinement at hard labor for 6 months (confinement in excess of 45 days suspended for 4 months), reduction to the pay grade of E-1 and a forfeiture of pay.
He again went AWOL on 9 March 1970 and remained absent until he was returned to military control on 24 March 1970.
The facts and circumstances surrounding his administrative discharge are not present in the available records. However, his records do contain a duly constituted report of separation (DD Form 214) signed by the applicant, which shows that he was discharged under other than honorable conditions on 7 May 1970, under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-212 for unfitness due to an established pattern for shirking. He had served 1 year, 4 months and 23 days of total active service and had 479 days of lost time due to AWOL and confinement.
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 board’s 15-year statute of limitations.
Army Regulation 635-212, in effect at the time, set forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel. It provided, in pertinent part, that members involved in frequent incidents of a discreditable nature with civil and/or military authorities, established pattern for shirking, established pattern of failure to pay just debts, drug addiction, failure to support dependents and lewd or indecent acts 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, applicable law and regulations, it is concluded:
1. In the absence of evidence to the contrary, it must be presumed that the applicant’s administrative separation was accomplished in accordance with applicable regulations with no procedural errors that would tend to jeopardize his rights.
2. Accordingly, the type of discharge and the reasons therefore were appropriate considering the available facts of the case.
3. The applicant’s contentions have been noted by the Board. However, they are not sufficiently mitigating to warrant relief when compared to his overall record of service. Furthermore, the applicant committed his last AWOL offense while under suspension from his last court-martial and was subject to have the remainder of his sentence vacated.
4. The Board finds it reasonable to presume that the chain of command considered his combat service when it elected to administratively discharge him rather than court-martial him for his latest offenses and make him serve the vacated portion of his previous court-martial sentence. In doing so, they prevented him from possible conviction by another court-martial and serving any additional confinement.
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
__tk ____ __lf_____ ___mkp__ DENY APPLICATION
| CASE ID | AR2003083527 |
| SUFFIX | |
| RECON | YYYYMMDD |
| DATE BOARDED | 2003/05/13 |
| TYPE OF DISCHARGE | UD |
| DATE OF DISCHARGE | 1970/05/07 |
| DISCHARGE AUTHORITY | AR635-212 |
| DISCHARGE REASON | UNFIT |
| BOARD DECISION | DENY |
| REVIEW AUTHORITY | |
| ISSUES 1. 583 | 144.5000/A51.00 |
| 2. | |
| 3. | |
| 4. | |
| 5. | |
| 6. |
ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100016752
He also states he did not receive his final pay at the time of his discharge and he was told his discharge would be upgraded in 6 months. At the time of his discharge he acknowledged with his signature that he had been informed of the procedures for applying to the Army Discharge Review Board for an upgrade of his discharge within that board's 15-year statute of limitations. There is no evidence in the available records regarding his pay from 15 March 1969 to 20 June 1969 when he was discharged.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2003 | 2003086066C070212
The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein. APPLICANT STATES : In effect, that his discharge should be upgraded because he was accepted under lowered enlistment standards and he was diagnosed with an immature personality, passive aggressive type – chronic. After hearing testimony and reviewing the evidence of record, the ADRB again determined that the applicant was properly discharged and that there was...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090000371
On 18 October 1967, the convening authority suspended the unexecuted portion of the FSMs sentence pertaining to confinement at hard labor for 123 days, unless sooner vacated. There is no evidence in the available record to show the FSM ever applied to the Army Discharge Review Board (ADRB) for an upgrade of his discharge within that board's 15-year statute of limitations. When authorized, it is issued to a Soldier whose military record is satisfactory but not sufficiently meritorious to...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002075430C070403
EVIDENCE OF RECORD : The applicant's military records show: The sentence was adjudged on 5 December 1969 but on 9 December, so much of the sentence which provided for confinement was suspended for 3 months. On 22 December 1969, the applicant was reassigned back to Fort Hood and while he was pending assignment to a unit at Fort Hood, he again absented himself without proper authority from the 502 nd Adjutant General Replacement Company on 28 December 1969, and remained AWOL until he was...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080012275
The applicant states that he served 6 months in Vietnam and after 40 years and the amnesty granted by the President, he should also receive an upgrade of his discharge. The applicant was convicted by a special court-martial on 24 August 1967 of being AWOL from Fort Riley from 23 September 1966 to 19 June 1967. Accordingly, the applicant was transferred to Fort Lewis, Washington where he was discharged with an undesirable discharge on 22 June 1968, under the provisions of Army Regulation...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002072150C070403
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: 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 board’s 15-year statute of limitations.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | 20110019387
His unit commander recommended approval of his request with a general discharge. There is no evidence that the applicant applied to the Army Discharge Review Board for upgrade of his discharge within its 15-year statute of limitations. Therefore, the Board determined that the overall merits of this case are insufficient as a basis for correction of the records of the individual concerned.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140002585
He respectfully requests reconsideration of the Board's decision to correct his military records to show he was discharged with a general under honorable conditions discharge. The applicant's request for reconsideration of his request for an upgrade of his undesirable discharge to a general discharge because his family was under extreme financial hardship during the period of service under review and based on his post-service conduct and achievements was carefully considered. Records show...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002076102C070215
He had completed 2 years, 9 months and 9 days of creditable service and had 428 days lost time due to being AWOL or in confinement. There is no evidence that the applicant applied to the Army Discharge Review Board for upgrade of his discharge within its 15-year statute of limitations. There is no available evidence of record and the applicant provides none to show that he had any medical condition which indicates he was unfit for separation.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2006 | 20060004437C070205
Thomas Ray | |Member | The Board considered the following evidence: Exhibit A - Application for correction of military records. He applied to the Army Discharge Review Board (ADRB) on 28 February 1984 requesting that his undesirable discharge be upgraded to a general discharge. 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,...