| Mr. Carl W. S. Chun | Director | |
| Mr. William Blakely | Analyst |
| Ms. Shirley L. Powell | Chairperson | ||
| Mr. Walter T. Morrison | Member | ||
| Mr. Thomas A. Pagan | Member |
APPLICANT REQUESTS: In effect, that his undesirable discharge (UD) be upgraded to an honorable discharge (HD).
APPLICANT STATES: In effect, that he suffered with epilepsy while on active duty and this condition led to his UD. He now feels that the Board should consider his medical condition as factor in determining if an upgrade of his discharged is warranted.
COUNSEL CONTENDS: In effect, counsel outlines the applicant’s contentions and his issues. Further, counsel requests that the applicant’s contention that his epilepsy condition may have had contributed to his misconduct be assessed and that his discharge upgrade request be fairly adjudicated.
EVIDENCE OF RECORD: The applicant's military records show:
On 1 June 1973, he entered active duty in the Army. He was trained and served in military occupational (MOS) 11B (Light Weapons Infantryman), and his record shows that the highest rank he attained while serving on active duty was specialist four/E-4 (SP4/E-4).
The applicant’s record documents no acts of valor, significant achievement, or service warranting special recognition. However, it does reveal a disciplinary history that includes his acceptance of non-judicial punishment (NJP) under the provisions of Article 15 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) on
15 January 1975, for using disrespectful language towards a noncommissioned officer (NCO).
On 18 July 1975, court-martial charges were preferred against the applicant for demonstrating disrespect towards a commissioned officer, using disrespectful language towards a NCO, and wrongfully communicating a threat to a NCO.
On 29 July 1975, the applicant consulted legal counsel and was advised of the basis for the contemplated trial by court-martial; the maximum allowable punishment; and the possible effects of an UD discharge. Subsequent to this counseling, the applicant voluntarily requested to be discharged for the good of the service, in lieu of trial by court-martial, under the provisions of chapter 10,
Army Regulation 635-200. The appropriate authority approved the applicant’s discharge request on 29 August 1975, and directed that he receive an UD and that he be reduced to the lowest enlisted grade.
On 9 September 1975, the applicant underwent a separation physical examination. The Report of Medical Examination (SF 88) that documents this examination contains no indication that the applicant was suffering from epilepsy or any other medical condition. The record is also void of any medical treatment records that suggest the applicant was ever treated for epilepsy or related conditions while he was serving on active duty.
On 12 September 1975, the applicant was discharged after completing a total of 2 years, 3 months, and 1 day of creditable active military service.
On 13 November 1979, the Army Discharge Review Board determined the applicant’s discharge was proper and equitable, and it voted to deny the applicant’s request to upgrade his discharge.
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 UD.
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 Board notes the applicant’s contention that an upgrade of his discharge is warranted because his misconduct was a result of his suffering from epilepsy. However, the Board finds insufficient evidence to support this claim.
2. The Board carefully considered the medical evidence submitted by the applicant. While it is unfortunate that he now suffers from epilepsy, absent any indication that he suffered from this illness or its effects while he was on active duty, or that this condition contributed to his misconduct, the Board finds this factor does not mitigate the misconduct on which his discharge was based.
3. The evidence of record confirms that the applicant was charged with the commission of offenses punishable under the UCMJ with a punitive discharge. The Board notes that after consulting with defense counsel, the applicant voluntarily requested separation from the Army in lieu of trial by court-martial. In doing so, he admitted guilt to the stipulated offense(s) under the UCMJ.
4. The Board is satisfied that all requirements of law and regulation were met and the rights of the applicant were fully protected throughout the separation process and that the type of discharge directed and the reasons therefore were appropriate considering all the facts of the case.
5. 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.
6. 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
WTM___ __TAP__ __SLP__ DENY APPLICATION
| CASE ID | AR200308535 |
| SUFFIX | |
| RECON | |
| DATE BOARDED | |
| TYPE OF DISCHARGE | UD |
| DATE OF DISCHARGE | 19750912 |
| DISCHARGE AUTHORITY | AR635-200 . . . . . |
| DISCHARGE REASON | In lieu of trial by CM |
| BOARD DECISION | DENY |
| REVIEW AUTHORITY | |
| ISSUES 1. 689 | 144.7000 |
| 2. 855 | 144.9321 |
| 3. | |
| 4. | |
| 5. | |
| 6. |
ARMY | BCMR | CY2003 | 2003085235C070212
EVIDENCE OF RECORD : The applicant's military records show: 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. The evidence of record confirms that the applicant was charged with the commission of offenses punishable...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090010212
The applicant's record shows he accepted non-judicial punishment (NJP) under the provisions of Article 15 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) on the following six separate occasions for the offenses indicated: 3 June 1976, for being absent without leave (AWOL) and failing to go at the time prescribed time to his appointed place of duty; 10 December 1976, for being AWOL; 31 March 1977, for wrongfully urinating on the floor of the living quarters of his fellow platoon members and...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080004844
Application for correction of military records (with supporting documents provided, if any). On 1 March 1976, the separation authority approved the applicants request for discharge, and directed that he receive an UD. The evidence of record confirms the applicant was charged with the commission of an offense punishable under the UCMJ with a punitive discharge.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | 20110000004
The applicant requests an upgrade of his discharge under other than honorable conditions (UOTHC). Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel. Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 3-7a, provides that an honorable discharge is a separation with honor and entitles the recipient to benefits provided by law.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2001 | 2001061001C070421
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 4 June 1969, after consulting with legal counsel and being advised of the basis for the contemplated trial by court-martial for an offense or offenses punishable by a bad conduct discharge, the rights available to him, and the effects of an UD, the applicant voluntarily elected to request a discharge under the...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080012404
THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE: 1. On 8 October 1976, the separation authority approved the applicants request for discharge, and directed that he receive a UD. The DD Form 214 he was issued at that time confirms he was separated under the provisions of chapter 10, Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations), for the good of the service.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090017687
On 1 August 1975, the separation authority approved the applicant's request for discharge for the good of the service in accordance with chapter 10 of Army Regulation 635-200 and directed he receive an Undesirable Discharge Certificate. The DD Form 214 he was issued shows he was discharged for the good of the service in lieu of a court-martial with a characterization of service of under other than honorable conditions. Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 3-7a, provides that an honorable...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140019946
THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE: 1. The applicant requests that his undesirable discharge be upgraded to a fully honorable discharge. The ABCMR does not grant requests for upgrade of discharges solely for the purpose of making the applicant eligible for veterans or medical benefits.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2001 | 2001064142C070421
The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein. On 29 April 1977, after consulting with counsel about his rights, the applicant requested discharge under the provisions of chapter 10, Army Regulation (AR) 635-200, for the good of the service in lieu of trial by court-martial. Accordingly, on 20 May 1977, the applicant was discharged from the Army after completing 1 year, 10 months, and 3 days of creditable military...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100012208
The applicants military record includes a Standard Form 93 (Report of Medical History) that shows he was diagnosed with a seizure disorder in 1973, for which he took 300 milligrams of Dilantin per day. On 30 September 1976, the separation authority approved the applicant's request for discharge under the provisions of chapter 10, Army Regulation 635-200, and directed he be issued a UD. The DD Form 214 (Report of Separation from Active Duty) the applicant was issued shows he was discharged...