| Mr. Carl W. S. Chun | Director | |
| Mr. William Blakely | Analyst |
| Ms. Joann H. Langston | Chairperson | ||
| Ms. Jennifer L. Prater | Member | ||
| Mr. Paul M. Smith | Member |
APPLICANT REQUESTS: In effect that his undesirable discharge (UD) be upgraded to either a general, under honorable conditions discharge (GD) or an honorable discharge (HD).
APPLICANT STATES: In effect, that the overall quality of his service was not considered in determining the type of discharge he would receive as a result of his voluntarily requesting to be discharged for the good of the service/in lieu of trial by court-martial. In support of his application, he submits a copy of his separation document (DD Form 214).
EVIDENCE OF RECORD: The applicant's military records show:
On 11 July 1969, the applicant was inducted into the Army for two years. He successfully completed training and was awarded military occupational specialty (MOS) 51N (Water Supply Specialist). His record documents no acts or valor, significant achievement, or service warranting special recognition, and it confirms that the highest rank he attained while serving on active duty was private first class/E-3 (PFC/E-3).
The applicant’s record also shows that he twice went absent without leave (AWOL) from his unit. His first period of AWOL was from 1 March to 13 April 1970, and his second period was from 22 September to 23 September 1970. On 15 November 1970, he went AWOL a third time, and he remained away until returning to military control on 22 February 1971.
A court-martial charge was preferred against the applicant for his AWOL period from 15 November 1970 to 22 February 1971. On 3 March 1971, the applicant consulted with legal counsel, and after being advised of the basis for the contemplated trial by court-martial and the effects of an UD, he 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.
On 25 March 1971, the appropriate authority approved the applicant’s request for discharge, and he directed that the applicant receive an UD and be reduced to the lowest enlisted grade. On 2 April 1971, the applicant was discharged accordingly. At the time of his discharge, he had completed a total of 1 year,
3 months, and 26 days of active military service and he had accrued 146 days of lost time due to AWOL.
There is no evidence that the applicant applied to the Army Discharge Review Board for upgrade of his discharge within its 15-year statue of limitations
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.
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 his discharge should be upgraded based on his overall record of service. However, it finds an insufficient evidentiary basis to support the requested relief.
2. The evidence of record confirms that the applicant was charged with the commission of an offense punishable under the Uniform Code of Military Justice (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 under the UCMJ.
3. 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 applicant’s overall record of service was not sufficiently meritorious to warrant an upgrade of his discharge at this time.
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
__JHL _JLP_ __PMS _ DENY APPLICATION
| CASE ID | AR2003085478 |
| SUFFIX | |
| RECON | |
| DATE BOARDED | |
| TYPE OF DISCHARGE | UOTHC |
| DATE OF DISCHARGE | 19710402 |
| DISCHARGE AUTHORITY | AR 635-200. . . . . |
| DISCHARGE REASON | In Lieu of Trial CM |
| BOARD DECISION | DENY |
| REVIEW AUTHORITY | |
| ISSUES 1. 708 | 144.7000 |
| 2. | |
| 3. | |
| 4. | |
| 5. | |
| 6. |
ARMY | BCMR | CY2003 | 2003087897C070212
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: 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...
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 | CY2011 | 20110004854
He provides: * DA Form 20 (Enlisted Qualification Record), page 3 * His request for discharge for the good of the service * Report of Medical Examination, dated 29 October 1971 * Addendum to 1AA Form 515 (Transmittal of Court-Martial Charges), dated 28 January 1971 * UD Certificate, dated 17 February 1971 * Three character reference letters CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE: 1. On 24 November 1970, the applicants unit commander recommended the applicant be discharged under the provisions of Army...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090001417
On 19 March 1971, the separation authority approved the applicants request for discharge and directed that he receive a UD. At the time of the applicant's discharge, the issuance of a UD was authorized. 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.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090002957
Application for correction of military records (with supporting documents provided, if any). The applicant requests an upgrade of his undesirable discharge (UD). The evidence of record further shows the applicant voluntarily requested administrative discharge to avoid a court-martial that could have resulted in his receiving a punitive discharge.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100027330
The applicant requests an upgrade of his undesirable discharge (UD). Subsequent to receiving this legal counsel, the applicant voluntarily 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-marital In his request for discharge, the applicant acknowledged that as a result of his request, he could receive an Undesirable Discharge Certificate; that he could...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080012943
Application for correction of military records (with supporting documents provided, if any). The applicant requests, in effect, an upgrade of his undesirable discharge (UD). At the time of the applicant's discharge, an UD was normally considered appropriate.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | 20110003310
IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 30 August 2011 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20110003310 THE BOARD CONSIDERED THE FOLLOWING EVIDENCE: 1. In his request for discharge, he indicated he understood that if his request for discharge was accepted, he would normally be discharged under other than honorable conditions and be furnished an Undesirable Discharge Certificate. _______ _ _ X _______ ___ CHAIRPERSON I certify that herein is recorded the true and complete record of the proceedings of the Army Board for...
ARMY | BCMR | CY1997 | 9710984
In accordance with Army Regulation 15-185, the application and the available military records pertinent to the corrective action requested were reviewed to determine whether to authorize a formal hearing, recommend that the records be corrected without a formal hearing, or to deny the application without a formal hearing if it is determined that insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate the existence of probable material error or injustice. EVIDENCE OF RECORD : The...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002074024C070403
The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein. On 7 July 1977, the Army Discharge Review Board (ADRB) denied his request for upgrade of 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: