| Mr. Carl W. S. Chun | Director | |
| Mr. Kenneth H. Aucock | Analyst |
| Mr. Fred N. Eichorn | Chairperson | |
| Ms. Margaret V. Thompson | Member | |
| Mr. John T. Meixell | Member |
APPLICANT REQUESTS: That his discharge under other than honorable conditions be upgraded to honorable.
APPLICANT STATES: That he was young, and made one mistake in 5 1/2 years because of his bad judgment. His years of honorable service should outweigh one bad mistake. He has been working hard to change his life for the better.
EVIDENCE OF RECORD: The applicant's military records show:
The applicant enlisted in the Army for three years on 26 February 1979, completed training, and in June 1979 was assigned to an infantry company at Fort Stewart, Georgia. On 26 August 1981, the applicant, then a Specialist Four, reenlisted in the Army for five years, and in December of that year was assigned to Fort Lewis, Washington as an infantryman. On 25 January 1982 he was awarded the Good Conduct Medal for the period 26 February 1979 to 25 February 1982.
On 25 June 1982 the applicant was dropped punitively from an Noncommissioned Officer (NCO) course for leaving the course area without permission.
On 2 July 1982 the applicant received nonjudicial punishment under Article 15, Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ), for sleeping on guard duty and for failing to go to his place of duty. He was reduced to pay grade E-1.
The applicant was advanced to the rank of private first class on 1 March 1983. In July 1983 he was assigned to an infantry company of the 2nd Infantry Division in Korea. He was promoted to pay grade E-4 on 1 October 1983.
On 20 July 1984 the applicant consulted with counsel and voluntarily requested discharge for the good of the service under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 10. He stated that he acknowledged that he was guilty of the charges against him which authorized the imposition of a bad conduct or dishonorable discharge. He stated that under no circumstances did he desire further rehabilitation. He stated that he understood the nature and consequences of the discharge under other than honorable conditions that he might receive. He declined to submit a statement in his own behalf. He requested a delay in the processing of all court-martial charges pending final action on his request for discharge.
Court-martial charges were prepared against the applicant on 28 July 1984 for transferring duty free or tax-free goods to a person not authorized those privileges, for purchasing goods for illegal transfer or production of income, for making a false official statement with intent to deceive, and for wrongful possession of marijuana.
An 8 September 1984 investigating officer's report of charges under Article 32, UCMJ, indicated that the applicant had admitted to black marketing activities, e.g., violation of a lawful general regulation by purchasing in excess of prescribed limits and/or reasonably anticipated needs and wrongful transfer of duty free goods. That investigation also indicated that there was the possibility of guilt on the part of the applicant concerning the possession of illegal drugs; however, the evidence did not so substantiate. The investigating officer recommended that the applicant be processed for separation for misconduct.
On 15 September 1984 the separation authority approved the applicant's request for discharge for the good of the service, and directed that the charges and specifications referred to court-martial be withdrawn. He directed that the applicant be issued a discharge certificate Under Other Than Honorable Conditions.
The applicant was discharged on 27 September 1984. He had 5 years, 7 months, and 1 day of service.
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.
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 request for a chapter 10 discharge, even after appropriate and proper consultation with a military lawyer, tends to show he wished to avoid the court-martial and the punitive discharge that he might have received. 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 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 completed training, was 23 years old and had over five years of service at the time of his misconduct. The Board also notes his profession of good post service conduct. In view of the nature of his misconduct, that is also not sufficiently mitigating to warrant relief.
3. The applicant has submitted neither probative evidence nor a convincing argument in support of his request.
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 that 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
__FNE __ __MVT__ __JTM___ DENY APPLICATION
| CASE ID | AR2003086678 |
| SUFFIX | |
| RECON | YYYYMMDD |
| DATE BOARDED | 20030819 |
| 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 | CY2007 | 20070016233
On 5 April 1977, the applicant reenlisted in the Army for 3 years, in the pay grade of E-4. There is no evidence in the available record, nor has the applicant submitted any evidence to support to his contention that he had an alcohol problem while he was in the Army and the fact that he now contends that he did is an insufficient justification for upgrading his discharge. In regard to the applicant's Request for Waiver, there is insufficient evidence to support the applicants request to...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002074334C070403
Prior to the period of service under review the applicant served honorably in the Regular Army (RA) from 20 April 1976-22 October 1979 and from 23 October 1979-25 July 1982. On the same date, at Building 1706, Flak Kaserne, Stuttgart, Germany, the applicant sold the undercover military police investigator (MPI) a $20.00 piece of marijuana in the hashish form. DISCUSSION : Considering all the evidence, allegations, and information presented by the applicant, together with the evidence of...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002072184C070403
The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein. On 17 November 1981, his commander notified him that he was considering whether he should impose NJP against the applicant for being disrespectful towards a noncommissioned officer. In accordance with Title 10, United States Code, section 1552, the authority under which this Board acts, the Army Board for Correction of Military Records is not empowered to set aside a conviction.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2006 | 20060014659
He was convicted of the wrong crime as it relates to the assault, although he admits to being guilty of conspiracy to assault. Personnel acting as Military Police are one of these special categories by virtue of the fact that it is their job to enforce the law. The applicant contends that drugs and or alcohol were factors in the offenses; however, the record contains no documentation to support that the applicant was under the influence of drugs or alcohol at the time he committed the acts.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2013 | 20130006337
The applicant requests an upgrade of his under other than honorable conditions discharge to an honorable discharge. In addition, his records contain the DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) he was issued that shows he was discharged on 10 February 1982, in the rank of PVT, under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 10, for conduct triable by court-martial with an under other than honorable conditions characterization of service. The evidence of...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2003 | 2003090776C070212
The applicant is requesting correction of an injustice which occurred on 17 January 1985, and again on 28 May 1986 when the Army Discharge Review Board (ADRB) denied his request to upgrade his discharge. The application submitted in this case is dated 6 May 2003. He was discharged on 17 January 1985.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002073444C070403
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 | CY2003 | 2003086025C070212
EVIDENCE OF RECORD : The applicant's military records show: The applicant was discharged with a bad conduct discharge on 23 August 1984 in the rank and pay grade, Private, E-1, under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 3, section IV, as a result of court-martial. After reviewing the applicant service record, the Board found no basis upon which to grant clemency and an upgrade of the applicant's discharge.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2003 | 2003083411C070212
I certify that hereinafter is recorded the true and complete record of the proceedings of the Army Board for Correction of Military Records in the case of the above-named individual. On 28 June 1982, the applicant was convicted by a general court-martial of possession of ammunition and explosives, value in excess of $100.00, and possession of marijuana. On 25 October 1983, the U. S. Court of Military Appeals denied the applicant's petition for a grant of review.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | 20110023043
IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 10 May 2012 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20110023043 THE BOARD CONSIDERED THE FOLLOWING EVIDENCE: 1. His DD Form 214 shows he was discharged in accordance with chapter 11 of Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations) as a result of court-martial with a bad conduct discharge. His conviction and discharge were effected in accordance with applicable laws and regulations and the discharge appropriately characterizes the misconduct for which he was convicted.