| Mr. Carl W. S. Chun | Director | |
| Mr. G. E. Vandenberg | Analyst |
| Ms. Joann H. Langston | Chairperson | |
| Ms. Margaret K. Patterson | Member | |
| Mr. Arthur A. Omartian | Member |
APPLICANT REQUESTS: That his discharge be upgraded.
APPLICANT STATES: That after serving in Vietnam, he got married and his wife became very ill. He states that he did a foolish thing and stayed with her instead of returning to his unit. He feels that he did not get any support from his command with his problems. He states that he now is diagnosed with type II diabetes and multiple myelomas due to Agent Orange exposure in Vietnam.
EVIDENCE OF RECORD: The applicant's military records show:
He entered active duty on 23 December 1969, completed training, and served in Germany without incident. He reenlisted on 2 February 1971 and is shown to have served in Vietnam from 7 June 1971 through 6 June 1972.
A DA Form 268 (Report of Suspension of Favorable Personnel Actions) reports that he was AWOL (absent without leave) on 1 December 1971.
The DA Form 20 shows that he was AWOL from 29 November 1971 to 16 January 1972 and in pretrial confinement from 20 January 1972 to 6 March 1972.
A 13 March 1972 special court-martial found him guilty of being AWOL from 1 December 1971 through 16 January 1972. He was sentenced to confinement for five Months, forfeiture of $188.00 per month for six months, and to be reduced to private (E-1).
On 12 February 1973 he was charged with being AWOL from 31 March 1972 through 10 February 1973.
On 13 February 1973, after consulting with counsel and being advised of his rights and options, he submitted a formal request for discharge for the good of the service in lieu of trial by court-martial under the provisions of Army Regulations 635-200, chapter 10. He acknowledged he had been advised of and understood his rights under the Uniform Code of Military Justice, that he could receive an undesirable discharge which would deprive him of many or all of his benefits as a veteran and he could expect to experience substantial prejudice in civilian life if he received an undesirable discharge.
He submitted a statement on his own behalf in which he states he had previously been court-martialed for being AWOL. He states that following the court-martial he had only his dress uniform to wear and was forced to do menial work in it. He stated that when he was told he would be going to the field in it, he went AWOL again. He also stated that his wife was having “female problems”.
The discharge authority approved his request and directed that he be given an undesirable discharge certificate.
He was discharged on 7 March 1973 with an under other than honorable conditions characterization of service.
His DD Form 214 (Report of Transfer or Discharge) indicates that he was separated on temporary records. All entries at item 22 (Statement of Service) are marked not verified. Item 24 (Decorations) and 25 (Education) are marked unk (unknown). Item 26a (non-pay periods time lost) lists 31 March 1972 through 11 February 1973 and “other lost time not verified”. Item 30 (Remarks) shows 308 days lost.
From the available records, the staff of the Board calculates this period of creditable service as 1 year, 1 month, and 9 days with 405 days lost.
His DA Form 20 (Enlisted Qualification Record) shows he served in Germany as an 13D((Field Artillery Rocket Crewman). His service in Vietnam (from 7 June 1971 through 6 June 1972) is shown as an 11B (light weapons infantryman). The form lists his decorations as the National Defense Service Medal, the Vietnam Service Medal, and the Expert Badge with Rifle Bar.
Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel. Chapter 10 of that regulation provides 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, sets forth the maximum punishments for offenses chargeable under the UCMJ. A punitive discharge is authorized for offenses under Article 86, for periods of AWOL in excess of 30 days.
DISCUSSION: Considering all the evidence, allegations, and information presented by the applicant, together with the evidence of record and applicable law and regulations, it is concluded:
1. 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.
2. The Board notes his prior honorable service and his service in Vietnam. However, in light of his two extended periods of AWOL, there is insufficient evidence of mitigating factors to support an upgrade of his discharge.
3. 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.
4. 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.
| CASE ID | AR2003085413 |
| SUFFIX | |
| RECON | |
| DATE BOARDED | 20031023 |
| TYPE OF DISCHARGE | |
| DATE OF DISCHARGE | |
| DISCHARGE AUTHORITY | |
| DISCHARGE REASON | |
| BOARD DECISION | DENY |
| REVIEW AUTHORITY | |
| ISSUES 1. | 144 |
| 2. | |
| 3. | |
| 4. | |
| 5. | |
| 6. |
ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | 20110012800
The applicant requests upgrade of his general discharge to an honorable discharge (HD), addition of Air Medals to his DD Form 214 (Armed Forces of the United States Report of Transfer or Discharge), and restoration to the grade of E-5. On 5 July 1973, he requested discharge under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations - Enlisted Personnel), chapter 10, for the good of the service in lieu of trial by court-martial. All units in Vietnam were awarded the Republic...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100017685
The applicant requests upgrade of his general discharge to an honorable discharge. On 30 March 1982, the Army Discharge Review Board (ADRB) reviewed his request for upgrade of his discharge and undesirable discharge and determined his discharge was properly issued, but the characterization of service was inequitable. As a result, the Board recommends that all Department of the Army records of the individual concerned be corrected by: a. deleting from item 13 of his DD Form 214 for the...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090007911
The applicant arrived in the Republic of Vietnam on 19 June 1971 and was assigned to Headquarters and Headquarters Company, U.S. Army Support Command, Saigon. However, his DD Form 214 (Armed Forces of the United States Report of Transfer or Discharge) shows that he was discharged on 27 July 1973 under the provisions of chapter 10 of Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations) by reason of in lieu of trial by court-martial with an undesirable discharge and service characterized as under...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | 20110013887
Counsel requests an upgrade of the applicant's undesirable discharge to an honorable discharge. Although an honorable or general discharge is authorized, at the time the applicant was discharged an undesirable discharge was considered appropriate. The applicant contends that his undesirable discharge should be upgraded to honorable based on his overall record of military service, his post-service achievements, and because it will allow him to obtain veteran's benefits.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100007003
The applicant's DD Form 214 shows he was discharged on 25 May 1973 in accordance with Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations - Enlisted Personnel), chapter 10, for the good of the service, with service characterized as under other than honorable conditions: a. There is no evidence in the applicant's military personnel records that show he received any awards for valor or heroism. However, there is no evidence the Army Discharge Review Board acted on his request for an upgrade of...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100007472
The applicant requests an upgrade of his under other than honorable conditions discharge to a general discharge. In addition, in his statement that accompanied his request for discharge, the applicant stated he would go AWOL until he was discharged. As a result, the Board recommends that all Department of the Army records of the individual concerned be corrected by: a. deleting from item 24 of his DD Form 214 the Vietnam Service Medal and b. adding to item 24 of his DD Form 214 the Vietnam...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2003 | 2003090324C070212
EVIDENCE OF RECORD : The applicant's military records show: On 13 August 1975, the applicant submitted a request to the Army Discharge Review Board for upgrade of his undesirable discharge to an honorable discharge. The character of the discharge is commensurate with the applicant's overall record of military service which includes over 200 days of AWOL, at least five non-judicial punishments, and one court martial conviction in a period of less than three years.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080019099
On 4 February 1974, the separation authority approved the applicants request for discharge and directed that he be furnished an undesirable discharge. Accordingly, the applicant was discharged with an undesirable discharge on 13 March 1974 under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 10, for the good of the service. Since the applicants record of service included five nonjudicial punishments, one special court-martial conviction, and 357 days of lost time, his record of...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | 20110015485
IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 31 January 2012 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20110015485 THE BOARD CONSIDERED THE FOLLOWING EVIDENCE: 1. THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE: 1. The applicant requests an upgrade of his discharge to an honorable or a general discharge.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140016900
The applicant requests an upgrade of his undesirable discharge to an honorable discharge. The regulation stated in: a. The applicant's contentions were carefully considered; however, the evidence of record shows he reenlisted in the RA for assignment to Vietnam.