| Mr. Carl W. S. Chun | Director | |
| Ms. Antoinette Farley | Analyst |
| Mr. Raymond V. O’Connor, Jr. | Chairperson | ||
| Mr. John P. Infante | Member | ||
| Ms. Eloise C. Prendergast | Member |
APPLICANT REQUESTS: In effect that his Undesirable Discharge (UD) be upgraded.
APPLICANT STATES: In effect, that he made a mistake by entering the Army
at the age of 17 years old. He adds, that he thought by doing so he would be solving his problems at home with his parents. He states, that he was not yet ready for the type of responsibilities he incurred.
EVIDENCE OF RECORD: The applicant's military records show:
On 13 April 1971, at the age of 17 years and 3 months, he enlisted in the Regular Army (RA) for 3 years. He completed his military training and was awarded military occupational specialty (MOS) 36K20 (Wireman). On 9 July 1971, he was transferred to Fort Gordon, Georgia, for duty in his MOS. On 13 October 1971, he was further transferred to Fort Carson, Colorado for duty.
On 9 March 1972, the applicant accepted non-judicial punishment (NJP) under Article 15, Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ), for being absent without leave (AWOL) from 22 February to 7 March 1972. His punishment included restriction for 30 days, forfeiture of $55.00 pay and reduction to pay grade E-2, suspended for 90 days.
On 23 June 1972, the applicant was charged with one specification of violation of Article 86, UCMJ, for being AWOL from 1 May to 20 June 1972.
On 27 June 1972, the applicant completed a separation physical examination and was found qualified for separation.
On 28 June 1972, the applicant consulted with legal counsel and voluntarily requested discharge under the provisions of chapter 10, Army Regulation 635-200, for the good of the service, in lieu of trial by court-martial. He was advised that the offenses for which he was charged could lead to an undesirable discharge certificate (UD). He authenticated a statement in which he acknowledged that he understood the ramifications of receiving a UD, and that, as a result of the issuance of such a discharge, he would be deprived of many or all Army Benefits, and that he might be ineligible for many or all benefits administered by the Veterans Administration. The applicant submitted the following statement in his own behalf “…I like the Army, but the Army is interfering with my family life.” The applicant’s chain of command recommended approval of the request for discharge.
On 22 August 1972, the separation authority approved the request and directed issuance of an Undesirable Discharge Certificate.
On 30 October 1972, the applicant was separated, under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 10, for the good of the service, in lieu of trial by court-martial and issued an Undesirable Discharge Certificate. He completed
1 year, 4 months and 25 days of creditable active service. The applicant’s record shows that he had 64 days of lost time.
Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel. Chapter 10 of that regulation provides, in pertinent part, that a member who has committed an offense or offenses for which the authorized punishment includes a punitive discharge may, at any time after the charges have been preferred, submit a request for discharge for the good of the service in lieu of trial by court-martial. A discharge under other than honorable conditions is normally considered appropriate. However, at the time of the applicant's separation, the regulation provided for the issuance of an undesirable discharge.
The Manual for Courts-Martial, Table of Maximum Punishments, shows that a
punitive discharge is authorized for any AWOL of more than 30 days.
On 20 May 1983, the Army Discharge Review Board (ADRB) denied the applicant’s request to upgrade his discharge.
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 applicant's voluntary request for separation under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 10, for the good of the service, to avoid trial by court-martial, was administratively correct and in conformance with applicable regulations.
2. 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.
3. The Board has taken into consideration the applicant’s age at the time of enlistment; however, the applicant met the entrance qualification standards, which included the age requirements. He demonstrated the capacity for honorable service by completion of training and approximately 10 months of service without an offense of record. Further, the Board found no evidence that the applicant was any less mature than other soldiers of the same age who successfully completed their military service. Therefore, his alleged immaturity does not excuse the misconduct for which he was separated and is not sufficiently mitigating to warrant 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.
BOARD VOTE:
________ ________ ________ GRANT
________ ________ ________ GRANT FORMAL HEARING
RVO JPI ECP DENY APPLICATION
| CASE ID | AR2003084099 |
| SUFFIX | |
| RECON | |
| DATE BOARDED | 2003.06.12 |
| TYPE OF DISCHARGE | UD |
| DATE OF DISCHARGE | 1972-10-30 |
| DISCHARGE AUTHORITY | AR 635-200 |
| DISCHARGE REASON | A51.00 |
| BOARD DECISION | DENY |
| REVIEW AUTHORITY | AR 635.200 |
| ISSUES 1. | A71.00 |
| 2. | |
| 3. | |
| 4. | |
| 5. | |
| 6. |
ARMY | BCMR | CY1996 | 9608830C070209
The first specification covered the period the applicant was AWOL from Fort Ord, 7 September-18 October 1971 and the second specification was for an AWOL period 21-22 October (1 day) from Fort Leonard Wood. Accordingly, on 19 October 1972 the applicant was discharged while in an AWOL status after completing 1 year, 1 month, and 15 days of active military service and accruing 121 days of time lost. DISCUSSION: Considering all the evidence, allegations, and information presented by the...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2001 | 2001057282C070420
The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein. On 29 May 1971, he departed this unit in an AWOL status and remained absent until 7 July 1971 when he was returned to military control at Fort Polk, Louisiana. Chapter 10 of that regulation provides, in pertinent part, that a member who has committed an offense or offenses for which the authorized punishment includes a punitive discharge may, at any time after the charges...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2001 | 2001051384C070420
The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein. On 29 May 1971, he departed this unit in an AWOL status and remained absent until 7 July 1971 when he was returned to military control at Fort Polk, Louisiana. Chapter 10 of that regulation provides, in pertinent part, that a member who has committed an offense or offenses for which the authorized punishment includes a punitive discharge may, at any time after the charges...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | 20110003705
In his request for discharge, he acknowledged he understood that if his request was approved, he could be furnished an Undesirable Discharge Certificate. Although an honorable or general discharge is authorized, a UD was normally considered appropriate at the time the applicant was discharged. _______ _ __X_____ ___ CHAIRPERSON I certify that herein is recorded the true and complete record of the proceedings of the Army Board for Correction of Military Records in this case.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2005 | 20050004521C070206
The applicant requests that his records be corrected by upgrading his undesirable discharge to honorable. On 28 June 1972, the appropriate separation authority approved the applicant’s discharge request and directed his reduction to the lowest enlisted grade with the issuance of an undesirable discharge. At the time of the applicant’s separation, the regulation provided for the issuance of an undesirable discharge, characterized as under other than honorable conditions.
ARMY | BCMR | CY1997 | 9707418
The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein. Chapter 10 of that regulation provides, in pertinent part, that a member who has committed an offense or offenses for which the authorized punishment includes a punitive discharge may at any time after the charges are preferred, submit a request for discharge for the good of the service in lieu of trial by court-martial. The applicant was charged with the commission of...
ARMY | BCMR | CY1997 | 9707418C070209
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: In effect, that his undesirable discharge (UD) be upgraded to general discharge/under honorable conditions (GD). The record also contains documented evidence that on 5 January 1972 the applicant voluntarily requested discharge for the good of the service, under the provisions of Chapter 10 of...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080006508
Application for correction of military records (with supporting documents provided, if any). The record shows the applicant spent 56 days in military confinement (from 15 December 1971 through 8 February 1972). _______ _ X _______ ___ CHAIRPERSON I certify that herein is recorded the true and complete record of the proceedings of the Army Board for Correction of Military Records in this case.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002076496C070215
APPLICANT REQUESTS: That the deceased former service member’s (FSM’s) undesirable discharge be upgraded to honorable. Chapter 10 of that regulation provides, in pertinent part, that a member who has committed an offense or offenses for which the authorized punishment includes a punitive discharge may, at any time after the charges have been preferred, submit a request for discharge for the good of the service in lieu of trial by court-martial. However, at the time of the applicant's...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140000918
THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE: 1. The applicant requests an upgrade of his undesirable discharge (UD) to an honorable discharge. There is no evidence he applied to the Army Discharge Review Board within its 15-year statute of limitations for an upgrade of his discharge.