| Mr. Carl W. S. Chun | Director | |
| Ms. Joyce A. Wright | Analyst |
| Ms. Joann Langston | Chairperson | |
| Ms. Linda D. Simmons | Member | |
| Mr. Robert Duecaster | Member |
THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE:
1. The applicant requests that his bad conduct discharge be upgraded to honorable.
2. The applicant states that he is a Vietnam Veteran who made a mistake over 35 years ago. Upon his return from Vietnam, he received an honorable discharge prior to his reenlistment. He served his country before he received his second discharge; however, he now feels that it does not count for anything. He is unable to understand how his first discharge could be overlooked and is not proud of his second discharge. He is now hopeful that his second discharge can be upgraded to honorable. He has filed a claim for Agent Orange and is unable to change the mistakes that he has made. He now feels that 35 years is a long time to hold a grudge. During his incarceration, he obtained his General Education Development (GED) that is not shown on his DD 214 and he does not understand why. He now feels that his service in Vietnam was for nothing and that his last recourse was to write the President for a pardon.
3. The applicant provides no documentation in support of his application.
CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:
1. The applicant is requesting correction of injustice that occurred on 31 March 1969, the date of his discharge. The application submitted in this case is dated 30 December 2002.
2. 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. This provision of law allows the Army Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR) to excuse failure to file within the 3-year statute of limitation if the ABCMR determines that it would be in the interest of justice to do so. In this case, the ABCMR will conduct a review of the merits of the case to determine if it would be in the interest of justice to excuse the applicant’s failure to timely file.
3. The applicant's military records show he was inducted on 1 July 1965, as a general supply specialist, with a 9th grade education. He served in Vietnam from 25 January 1966 to 24 January 1967. He continued to serve until he was honorably discharged on 2 April 1967, in order to reenlist. He reenlisted on 3 April 1967.
4. He was convicted by two special courts-martial and one general court-martial of being AWOL from 18 May to 8 August 1967 (83 days), from 2 November 1967 to 19 January 1968 (78 days), and from 18 April to 20 October 1968 (185 days). His sentences consisted of forfeitures of pay, confinement at hard labor, a reduction to the pay grade of E-1, and a bad conduct discharge.
5. On 24 January 1969, the Court of Military Review affirmed the findings and sentence of the general court-martial conviction as approved by the convening authority.
6. On 31 March 1969, the applicant was discharged from the Army pursuant to the sentence of a general court-martial and was issued a Bad Conduct Discharge Certificate. He had served 2 years, 1 month, and 11 days of creditable service and had 599 days of lost time due to AWOL and confinement.
7. Item 25 (Education and Training Completed) of his DD Form 214, dated 31 March 1969 shows the entry "Civilian Education: 9 years." His DD Form 214, dated 2 April 1967, shows the entry "9 years - General Education" in item 30 (Remarks).
8. The applicant applied to the Army Discharge Review Board (ADRB) on
29 December 2002. However, his case was ineligible for review by the ADRB due to his conviction by a general court-martial. This Board accepted his DD Form 149, dated 30 December 2002.
9. Army Regulation 635-200, in effect, at the time, set forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel. Paragraph 11-1(b) of the regulation provided, in pertinent part, that an enlisted person would be given a bad conduct discharge pursuant only to an approved sentence of a general or special court-martial.
DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:
1. Careful consideration has been given to the applicant's contentions. The Board is fully aware of his Vietnam service, honorable discharge for his first enlistment, and his second discharge. It is noted that it has been approximately 35 years since his bad conduct discharge and that he requests that his bad conduct discharge be upgraded to honorable. However, his 599 days of lost time due to AWOL and confinement are too severe to warrant relief.
2. The applicant has provided no evidence to show that his discharge was unjust. He also has not provided any evidence sufficient to mitigate the character of his discharge.
3. Trial by court-martial was warranted by the gravity of the offenses charged. Conviction and discharge were effected in accordance with applicable law and regulation.
4. If the applicant desires to pursue a pardon, pardon issues are handled by the Office of the Pardon Attorney, Department of Justice. He should contact the Pardon Attorney at the following address: Office of the Pardon Attorney, 4th Floor, 500 First Street, NW, Department of Justice, Washington, DC 20530-0001 for further information.
5. The evidence of record shows that the applicant was not a high school graduate prior to his enlistment nor was he a graduate at the time of his separation from active duty. There is no evidence of record, and the applicant has failed to provide evidence, to show that he obtained his GED while incarcerated. Therefore, he is not entitled to correction of his DD Forms 214 to show that he completed his GED.
6. Records show the applicant should have discovered the error or injustice now under consideration on 31 March 1969; therefore, the time for the applicant to file a request for correction of any error or injustice expired on 31 March 1972. However, the applicant did not file within the 3-year statute of limitations and has not provided a compelling explanation or evidence to show that it would be in the interest of justice to excuse failure to file.
BOARD VOTE:
________ ________ ________ GRANT RELIEF
________ ________ ________ GRANT FORMAL HEARING
___JL____ ___LS_____ __RD____ DENY APPLICATION
| CASE ID | AR2003084919 |
| SUFFIX | |
| RECON | |
| DATE BOARDED | 20031120 |
| TYPE OF DISCHARGE | BCD |
| DATE OF DISCHARGE | 19690331 |
| DISCHARGE AUTHORITY | AR 635-200 paragraph 11-1b |
| DISCHARGE REASON | |
| BOARD DECISION | DENY |
| REVIEW AUTHORITY | |
| ISSUES 1. | 360 |
| 2. | |
| 3. | |
| 4. | |
| 5. | |
| 6. |
ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100009092
A Joint Alternate Service Board composed of military personnel would establish a period of alternate service of not more than 24 months that the individuals would perform. Both the Joint Board and Presidential Board were authorized to award a Clemency Discharge with the performance of alternate service. He was discharged pursuant to the sentence of a general court-martial and was issued a bad conduct discharge after the sentence was affirmed.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080011693
The applicant requests, in effect, that his bad conduct discharge be upgraded. 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. In general, a pardon is granted on the basis of the petitioner's demonstrated good conduct for a substantial period of time after conviction and service of sentence.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140021438
The board recommended the applicant be separated based on his convictions by civilian authorities, multiple intentional periods of AWOL, and excessive time lost. In his statement he indicated he left Vietnam to go home to his wife and child because his wife had filed for divorce and was writing bad checks. The Board notes that the applicant was 21 years of age, had satisfactorily completed training, had served in Vietnam and was awarded the Combat Infantryman Badge.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090019840
It also shows his 1 year, 6 months, and 13 days of AUS service and 1 year, 11 months, and 17 days of RA service, for total service of 3 years and 6 months. The military services issued the actual clemency discharges. The evidence of record shows he completed the alternative service.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2012 | 20120007854
The applicant states: * his DD Form 214 shows he was discharged under conditions other than honorable * he had no idea he was discharged under dishonorable conditions * if he went to Canada instead of Vietnam he could have received a pardon 3. Although an honorable or general discharge is authorized, an undesirable discharge was normally considered appropriate at the time of the applicant's discharge. There is no evidence in his record showing he was dishonorably discharged from the Army.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2006 | 20060000079C070205
He goes on to state that he served his tour of duty in Vietnam and was honorably discharged. He further states that his two tours in Vietnam, along with the Presidential Pardon he obtained and his subsequently successful civilian employment should justify an upgrade of his discharge. Accordingly, the Board determined that the applicant should be excused for failing to timely file for the upgrade of his discharge and to grant him an honorable discharge based on clemency.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080001305
At the time of the assessment, the applicant was also being evaluated for PTSD. The applicant, according to an examining psychiatrist and psychologists was suffering from the effects of PTSD; however, these assessments/evaluations took place in 2004 and in 2007, more than 36 years after he was discharged from the Army. The evidence of record failed to establish a basis upon which clemency could be granted and upon which the severity of the punishment imposed could be moderated with an...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100013492
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. When authorized, it is issued to a Soldier whose military record is satisfactory but not sufficiently meritorious to warrant an honorable discharge. Therefore, the applicant's record of service is insufficiently meritorious to warrant a...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2007 | 20070005298
On 14 May 1979, the Army Discharge Review Board (ADRB) reviewed the applicant's military records and all other available evidence and denied the applicant's request for a change in the character and reason of discharge. 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. Ann M. Campbell ______________________ CHAIRPERSON INDEX CASE...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090016234
The applicant states, in effect, he received a Clemency Discharge in 1976; however, he is not sure if he submitted a request to upgrade his discharge. At the time of his discharge the applicant had completed 3 months and 26 days of net active service during the period of service under review. Service discharge review boards and correction boards are not empowered to change the Clemency Discharge, but may review the underlying circumstances of the discharge.