| Mr. Carl W. S. Chun | Director | |
| Mr. Jessie B. Strickland | Analyst |
| Mr. Thomas B. Redfern | Chairperson | ||
| Ms. Linda D. Simmons | Member | ||
| Mr. John T. Meixell | Member |
APPLICANT REQUESTS: That his undesirable discharge be upgraded to a general discharge.
APPLICANT STATES: That although he deserved the undesirable discharge at the time, he believes that he has become a better man than he used to be, that the discharge has served its purpose and that he desires to resolve this chapter in his life by having it upgraded to a general discharge. In support of his application he submits four third party statements attesting to his character.
EVIDENCE OF RECORD: The applicant's military records show:
He enlisted at 20 years of age in Roanoke, Virginia, on 31 May 1972, for a period of 2 years. He was transferred to Fort Jackson, South Carolina, to undergo his basic combat training (BCT).
He went absent without leave (AWOL) from 18 June to 2 October 1972 and from 10 October 1972 to 4 January 1973, when he was returned to military control at Fort Belvoir, Virginia, on 5 January 1973, where charges were preferred against him for the AWOL offenses.
He pled guilty to the charges and was convicted by a special court-martial on 1 February 1973. He was sentenced to confinement at hard labor for 4 months and a forfeiture of pay.
He was transferred to the Army Retraining Brigade at Fort Riley, Kansas, to serve his confinement and on 30 April 1973, he departed for Fort Lee, Virginia, to undergo his advanced individual training (AIT) as a petroleum storage specialist. His report date was 11 May 1973 and he failed to report as ordered. He was reported as AWOL effective 12 May 1973 and remained absent until he was apprehended/arrested by civil authorities in Lynchburg, Virginia, on 2 April 1974, for assault and battery, petty larceny, trespassing and AWOL.
His lost time from that point was from 31 May through 25 July 1974, from 26 July 1974 through 22 August 1975, from 25 August through 30 December 1975 and from 31 December 1975 until his separation.
His records show that on 14 January 1975, he was arrested in North Carolina for a robbery that occurred in Lynchburg, Virginia, and was extradited to Virginia. The charges were dismissed on 24 January 1975.
He was arrested by civil authorities in Lynchburg on 19 July 1975, for failure to appear on a charge of armed robbery.
On 31 December 1975, he was arrested for one count of grand larceny and two counts of armed robbery in Rustburg, Virginia, and was confined by civil authorities. He pled guilty to two charges of armed robbery and on 8 March 1976, he was sentenced to serve two consecutive 5-year sentences in the Powhatan Correctional Facility.
On 12 April 1976, the applicant's commander submitted a request for discharge under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-206, due to conviction by civil authorities. The applicant waived his rights and indicated that he did not wish to appeal his civil conviction.
The appropriate authority approved the recommendation for discharge and directed that he be furnished an Undesirable Discharge Certificate.
Accordingly, he was discharged under other than honorable conditions under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-206, for misconduct – conviction by civil authorities. He had served 2 months and 6 days of total active service and had 1,372 days of lost time. He was still in a trainee status at the time of his discharge.
There is no indication in the available records to show that the applicant 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 635-206, in effect at the time, set forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel. Paragraph 33 of the regulation provided, in pertinent part, that members convicted by civil authorities would be processed for separation. A discharge could not be initiated unless the individual concerned declined to appeal the civil conviction or until their appeals had been exhausted. An undesirable discharge was normally considered appropriate.
Army Regulation 635-200, currently in effect, sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted. Chapter 14 establishes policy and prescribes procedures for separating members for misconduct. Specific categories include minor disciplinary infractions, a pattern of misconduct, commission of a serious offense, conviction by civil authorities, desertion or AWOL. A discharge under other than honorable conditions is 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 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’s administrative separation was accomplished in compliance with applicable regulations with no violations or procedural errors, which would tend to jeopardize his rights.
3. Accordingly, the type of discharge directed and the reasons therefore were appropriate considering all of the available facts of the case.
4. The applicant’s contentions and supporting statements have been noted by the Board. However, given the seriousness of his offenses and his otherwise undistinguished record of service, they are not sufficiently mitigating to warrant an upgrade of his discharge.
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
__jm____ ___lds___ ___tbr___ DENY APPLICATION
| CASE ID | AR2003084226 |
| SUFFIX | |
| RECON | YYYYMMDD |
| DATE BOARDED | 2003/05/01 |
| TYPE OF DISCHARGE | UD |
| DATE OF DISCHARGE | 1976/05/31 |
| DISCHARGE AUTHORITY | AR635-206 CONV CIV AUTH |
| DISCHARGE REASON | MISCONDUCT |
| BOARD DECISION | DENY |
| REVIEW AUTHORITY | |
| ISSUES 1. 627 | 144.6100/A61.00 |
| 2. | |
| 3. | |
| 4. | |
| 5. | |
| 6. |
ARMY | BCMR | CY2005 | 20050014826C070206
On 17 June 1975, the applicant’s unit commander submitted a recommendation for the applicant’s discharge under the provisions of paragraph 33a of Army Regulation 635-206 (Personnel Separations), by reason of civil conviction. The applicant was discharged under other than honorable conditions on 21 December 1976 under the provision of section VI of Army Regulation 635-206, by reason of civil conviction. There is no evidence that the applicant applied for the Army Discharge Review Board for...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100000584
On 16 November 1978, the Army Discharge Review Board denied his request for an upgrade of his discharge. Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 3-7b, provides that a general discharge is a separation from the Army under honorable conditions. His service was not consistent with Army standards of acceptable personal conduct and performance of duty by military personnel.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002073963C070403
The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein. On 20 February 1975, the unit commander advised the applicant that he was being considered for separation from the Army under Army Regulation 635-206, based on his conviction by civil authorities. On 20 March 1975, the commander recommended the applicant’s discharge under Army Regulation 635-206.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2005 | 20050013625C070206
Counsel states that this is the applicant's third request for correction of his discharge records. The applicant was discharged without a hearing. The applicant was discharged on 23 May 1975.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | 20110015736
On 8 June 1974, after consulting with defense counsel, the applicant elected to have his case considered by a board of officers, to be granted a personal appearance before the board, and to be represented by counsel. Accordingly, he was discharged under other than honorable conditions on 27 September 1974 under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-206, due to conviction by civil authorities. After considering all of the available evidence, the ADRB determined that under the circumstances...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2006 | 20060000667C070205
THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE: 1. 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 Military Records (ABCMR) should commence on the date of final action by the ADRB. As a...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2012 | 20120010716
The applicant requests an upgrade of his undesirable discharge to an honorable discharge. He was convicted by civil authorities on 22 April 1975 and sentenced to incarceration in the State Penitentiary for 3 years. On 14 July 1975 the applicant's commander notified him that he was initiating action to discharge him from the service under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-206 (Personnel Separations Discharge Misconduct) due to his conviction by civil authorities.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | 20110022690
On 4 December 1975, the applicant's immediate commander forwarded a letter notifying him of his intent to initiate separation action against him in accordance with Army Regulation 635-206 (Personnel Separations Discharge Misconduct (Fraudulent Entry, Conviction by Civil Court, and Absence Without Leave or Desertion)) by reason of conviction by a civil court with an Undesirable Discharge Certificate. On 10 February 1976, the separation authority approved the applicant's discharge under...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2013 | 20130016618
On 12 March 1975, the applicant was notified that action was being taken to discharge him from the Army for misconduct conviction by civil authorities under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-206 (Personnel Separations Discharge Misconduct). The complete facts and circumstances surrounding the applicant's administrative discharge are not present in the available records; however, his records show the appropriate authority (a major general) approved the recommendation for...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2003 | 2003088119C070403
The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein. APPLICANT REQUESTS: That his undesirable discharge be upgraded to a more favorable discharge. On 10 July 1975, the applicant acknowledged that he had been advised that he was being recommended for separation from the service under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-206, due to his conviction by civil authorities.