| Mr. Carl W. S. Chun | Director | |
| Mr. Kenneth H. Aucock | Analyst |
| Mr. Raymond V. O'Connor, Jr. | Chairperson | |
| Mr. James E. Anderholm | Member | |
| Ms. Linda M. Barker | Member |
APPLICANT REQUESTS: In effect, that his discharge under conditions other than honorable (bad conduct discharge) be upgraded to honorable or general.
APPLICANT STATES: That at that time his wife wrote him that she was divorcing him. He left without permission to get his car. He was young and did not realize the ramifications of his actions.
EVIDENCE OF RECORD: The applicant's military records show:
The applicant was born in December 1946. He was inducted into the Army on 18 October 1966, completed training, and in March 1967 was assigned to Germany as a Pershing Missile crewman. In July 1967 he was promoted to pay grade E-4. On 15 August 1968 he was discharged with an honorable discharge, reenlisting the next day for three years.
On 9 January 1969 the applicant received nonjudicial punishment under Article 15, UCMJ, for one day of AWOL. On 26 February 1969 he received nonjudicial punishment for violating a lawful general regulation. In March 1969 he returned to the United States and was assigned to Fort Sill. On 5 April 1969 he received nonjudicial punishment for AWOL from 1 April 1969 until 4 April 1969 and for failure to go to his place of duty. On 14 April 1969 he was attached to an artillery battalion at Fort Chaffee, Arkansas.
On 12 October 1970, before a general court-martial which convened at Fort Sill, Oklahoma, the applicant was arraigned, tried, and found guilty of AWOL from 31 July 1969 until 1 October 1969 and from 18 October 1969 until 29 July 1970. He was sentenced to be discharged from the Army with a bad conduct discharge, to forfeit all pay and allowances, to be reduced to the grade of private E-1, and to be confined at hard labor for ten months.
On 6 November 1970 the Staff Judge Advocate reviewed the record of trial and determined that the sentence was legally correct. The sentence was approved by the convening authority. The applicant was confined at the United States Disciplinary Barracks at Fort Leavenworth, Kansas.
A 9 December 1970 report of a psychiatric examination indicates that the applicant was diagnosed as having an inadequate personality, chronic and moderate, manifested by ineffectual responses to social and intellectual
demands and difficulty with judgment under stress. The applicant was alert, oriented, cooperative, and had a good memory. Intellectual functioning appeared within the normal range. There were no abnormal mood swings, and the affect was appropriate to the thought content. Judgment appeared defective under stress. Insight was minimal. There were no indications of hallucinations or delusions.
On 7 January 1971 the United States Army Court of Military Review found the findings of guilty and sentence as approved correct in law and fact, but modified the confinement at hard labor to confinement for six months, and the forfeiture of all pay and allowances to forfeiture of $60.00 per month for six months. The sentence as modified was affirmed.
An undated report of medical examination does not indicate that the applicant had any medical problems. In a 4 March 1971 report of medical history the applicant stated that his health was good.
The applicant was discharged on 4 March 1971. He had 2 years, 9 months, and 20 days of service, and 575 days of lost time.
Army Regulation 635-200 provides for the discharge of enlisted soldiers, and states in pertinent part that a soldier will be given a bad conduct discharge pursuant only to an approved sentence of a general or special court-martial. The appellate review must be completed and the affirmed sentence ordered duly executed.
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 applicant's contention that he was young and immature at the time is not sufficiently mitigating to warrant relief. The Board notes that the applicant had completed his training and had served in Germany for two years prior to his first AWOL. He was 22 years of age at that time.
2. The applicant has submitted neither probative evidence nor a convincing argument in support of his request.
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 that 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.
BOARD VOTE:
________ ________ ________ GRANT
________ ________ ________ GRANT FORMAL HEARING
__RVO__ __JEA __ __LMB __ DENY APPLICATION
| CASE ID | AR2003086497 |
| SUFFIX | |
| RECON | YYYYMMDD |
| DATE BOARDED | 20030814 |
| TYPE OF DISCHARGE | (HD, GD, UOTHC, UD, BCD, DD, UNCHAR) |
| DATE OF DISCHARGE | YYYYMMDD |
| DISCHARGE AUTHORITY | AR . . . . . |
| DISCHARGE REASON | |
| BOARD DECISION | DENY |
| REVIEW AUTHORITY | |
| ISSUES 1. | 110.00 |
| 2. | |
| 3. | |
| 4. | |
| 5. | |
| 6. |
ARMY | BCMR | CY1997 | 9710634
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. The applicant requests...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2013 | 20130009567
Application for correction of military records (with supporting documents provided, if any). The applicant, the brother of a deceased former service member (FSM), requests an upgrade of his late brother's under other than honorable discharge to an honorable discharge. On 4 June 1971, the appropriate separation authority approved the FSMs requests under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 10, and directed the issuance of an Undesirable Discharge Certificate and reduction to...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002074155C070403
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: He was placed in confinement upon his last return to military control and charges were preferred against him for the AWOL offenses on 24 September 1970.
ARMY | BCMR | CY1997 | 9710634C070209
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 10 July 1968 the applicant was inducted into the Army of the United States for 2 years at the age of 19. The evidence of record and the independent evidence submitted by the applicant does not support his contentions that his legal counsel was inadequate or that his chain of command failed to respond to...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002075430C070403
EVIDENCE OF RECORD : The applicant's military records show: The sentence was adjudged on 5 December 1969 but on 9 December, so much of the sentence which provided for confinement was suspended for 3 months. On 22 December 1969, the applicant was reassigned back to Fort Hood and while he was pending assignment to a unit at Fort Hood, he again absented himself without proper authority from the 502 nd Adjutant General Replacement Company on 28 December 1969, and remained AWOL until he was...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2012 | 20120003365
IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 6 September 2012 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20120003365 THE BOARD CONSIDERED THE FOLLOWING EVIDENCE: 1. Application for correction of military records (with supporting documents provided, if any). When authorized, it was issued to a Soldier whose military record was satisfactory but not sufficiently meritorious to warrant an honorable discharge.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090004636
The applicant requests that his Bad Conduct Discharge (BCD) be upgraded to an honorable discharge. He was removed from training and he was transferred to Vietnam on 19 September 1969 for duty as a cannoneer. As a result, clemency in the form of either a fully honorable or a general discharge under honorable conditions is not warranted in this case.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2001 | 2001062564C070421
The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein. Although the documentation is not in the available records, evidence shows that after the commander preferred charges for AWOL, the applicant voluntarily requested discharge for the good of the service under Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 10, in lieu of trial by court-martial. Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations – Enlisted Personnel), paragraph 3-7 provides...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2001 | 2001058577C070421
The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein. APPLICANT REQUESTS: In effect, that his undesirable discharge be upgraded to a general discharge. He did not complete his airborne training and received orders transferring him to Fort Lewis, Washington with a report date of 25 April 1971.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | 20110012425
IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 1 March 2012 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20110012425 THE BOARD CONSIDERED THE FOLLOWING EVIDENCE: 1. The applicant requests an upgrade of his bad conduct discharge (BCD) to a general discharge. Chapter 11 states a Soldier will be given a bad conduct discharge pursuant only to an approved sentence of a general or special court-martial and the appellate review must be completed and the affirmed sentence ordered duly executed.