| Mr. Carl W. S. Chun | Director | |
| Ms. Rosa M. Chandler | Analyst |
| Mr. Fred N. Eichorn | Chairperson | |
| Mr. John P. Infante | Member | |
| Ms. Karen A. Heinz | Member |
THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE:
1. The applicant requests, in essence, that his general discharge (GD) under honorable conditions be upgraded to that of a fully honorable discharge (HD).
2. The applicant states, in essence, that he was unfit to serve in the military because he was unable to adapt to military life.
3. The applicant provides nothing in support of his request.
CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:
1. The applicant is requesting correction of an error or injustice which occurred on 30 September 1976, the date his undesirable discharge (UD) was upgraded to a GD by the Army Discharge Review Board (ADRB). The application submitted in this case is dated 21 March 2003.
2. Title 10, U.S. Code, Section 1552(b), provides that applications for correction of military records must be filed within 3 years after discovery of the alleged error or injustice. This provision of law allows the Army Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR) to excuse failure to file within the 3-year statute of limitation if the ABCMR determines that it would be in the interest of justice to do so. In this case, the ABCMR will conduct a review of the merits of the case to determine if it would be in the interest of justice to excuse the applicant’s failure to timely file.
3. On 19 July 1974, the applicant enlisted in the Regular Army (RA) for a period of 3 years. While assigned to Fort Polk, Louisiana for training, the applicant left his unit in an absent without leave (AWOL) status from 28 September 1974 until he was apprehended by civil authorities and returned to military control at Kirtland Air Force Base, New Mexico on 24 December 1974. He was then placed in pre-trial confinement at the Personnel Control Facility (PCF) at Fort Sill, Oklahoma.
4. On 17 January 1975, charges were preferred against the applicant for the above period of AWOL.
5. On 20 January 1975, the applicant underwent both a mental status evaluation and a medical examination, which determined he was qualified for separation.
6. On 21 January 1975, the applicant consulted with legal counsel and requested discharge for the good of the service in lieu of trial by court-martial under the provisions of chapter 10, Army Regulation (AR) 635-200. He was advised that he could receive a UD. He acknowledged that he understood the ramifications of receiving a UD. He contended in a statement submitted in his own behalf that he struggled through basic training and that he left his unit in an AWOL status because he was unable to adapt to military life. He also stated that he spoke to the post chaplain about his desire for separation and he was advised that only his commander could make that decision.
7. On 24 January 1975, the applicant's commander at the PCF recommended approval of the applicant’s request for discharge under the provisions of chapter 10, AR 635-200, for the good of the service with a UD. The applicant's commander stated that the applicant had become disenchanted with the Army and that further retention would not be in the best interest of the Army. On 29 January 1975, the separation authority approved the recommendation and directed that the applicant be separated with a UD.
8. On 3 February 1975, the applicant was separated with a UD under the provisions of chapter 10, AR 635-200. He had 3 months and 3 days of creditable active Federal service and 102 days of lost time.
9. On 8 October 1976, the ADRB reviewed the applicant's case and upgraded his UD to a GD. The reason for separation remained unchanged.
10. 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. At the time of the applicant's separation, a UD or a GD was appropriate.
DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:
1. The available record indicates the applicant's conduct was inconsistent with the Army’s standards for acceptable personal conduct and his overall quality of service did not warrant a fully honorable discharge.
2. The applicant had many legitimate avenues through which to obtain assistance with whatever problems he may have experienced without committing the misconduct which led to the separation action under review.
3. Records show the applicant should have discovered the error or injustice now under consideration in September 1976 after the ADRB review. Therefore, the time for the applicant to file a request for correction of any error or injustice expired in 1979, which was 3 years after the ADRB review. However, the applicant did not file within the 3-year statute of limitations and has not provided a compelling explanation or evidence to show that it would be in the interest of justice to excuse failure to file in this case.
BOARD VOTE:
________ ________ ________ GRANT RELIEF
________ ________ ________ GRANT FORMAL HEARING
__fne___ __jpi___ __kah___ DENY APPLICATION
| CASE ID | AR2003088580 |
| SUFFIX | |
| RECON | |
| DATE BOARDED | 20040205 |
| TYPE OF DISCHARGE | (GD) |
| DATE OF DISCHARGE | 19750203 |
| DISCHARGE AUTHORITY | AR635-200, Chap 10 |
| DISCHARGE REASON | A70.00 |
| BOARD DECISION | (DENY) |
| REVIEW AUTHORITY | |
| ISSUES 1. | 144.7000 |
| 2. | |
| 3. | |
| 4. | |
| 5. | |
| 6. |
ARMY | BCMR | CY2003 | 2003083912C070212
On the same date, the separation authority approved separation under the provisions of chapter 10, AR 635-200 with a UD. On 19 February 1975, as a result of a records review, the Army Discharge Review Board (ADRB) denied the applicant’s request for an upgrade of his discharge. However, at the time of the applicant's separation, the regulation provided for the issuance of a UD.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2003 | 2003088920C070403
Accordingly, the applicant was discharged with an undesirable discharge on 22 July 1976 under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 10, for the good of the service. On 12 March 1979, the Army Discharge Review Board (ADRB) denied the applicant's request for a general discharge. The applicant’s record of service included one special court-martial conviction, three nonjudicial punishments and 67 days of lost time.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2005 | 20050013625C070206
Counsel states that this is the applicant's third request for correction of his discharge records. The applicant was discharged without a hearing. The applicant was discharged on 23 May 1975.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2003 | 2003087942C070212
On 22 July 1975, the separation authority approved separation with a UD. He had completed 1 year, 2 months and 8 days of active military service. Carl W. S. Chun Director, Army Board for Correction of Military RecordsINDEXCASE IDAR2003087942SUFFIXRECONDATE BOARDED20031104TYPE OF DISCHARGE(UD)DATE OF DISCHARGE19750724DISCHARGE AUTHORITYAR635-200, Chap 13DISCHARGE REASONA51.00BOARD DECISION(DENY)REVIEW AUTHORITYISSUES 1.144.50002.3.4.5.6.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2003 | 2003091226C070212
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 27 February 1975, the applicant's unit commander recommended him for discharge from the service under the provisions of paragraph 13-5a(3)(b), Army Regulation 635-200, by reason of unfitness with a general, under honorable conditions discharge. A general or honorable discharge was normally considered...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2004 | 20040004121C070208
Lawrence Foster | |Member | The Board considered the following evidence: Exhibit A - Application for correction of military records. THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE: 1. At the time of the applicant's separation, a UD was appropriate.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2003 | 2003088668C070403
He was convicted on 22 January 1976 and sentenced to 3 years' confinement in the Texas Department of Corrections (TDC). On 3 September 1982, the Army Discharge Review Board (ADRB) denied the applicant's appeal for an upgrade of discharge. The U.S. Court of Appeals, observing that applicants to the Army Discharge Review Board (ADRB) are by statute allowed 15 years to apply there, and that this Board's exhaustion requirement (Army Regulation 15-185, paragraph 2-8), effectively shortens that...
ARMY | DRB | CY2005 | 20050012979
David K. Hassenritter | |Member | The Board considered the following evidence: Exhibit A - Application for correction of military records. On 16 March 1981, the Army Discharge Review Board (ADRB) voted to upgrade the applicant's UD to a general, under honorable conditions discharge (GD) based on his overall record of service; however, it concluded the reason for his discharge was proper and equitable. The U.S. Court of Appeals, observing that applicants to the Army Discharge Review Board...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002083076C070215
The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein. APPLICANT REQUESTS: That his undesirable discharge be upgraded to honorable. A condition of submitting such a request is that the individual concerned must admit guilt to the charges against them or of a lesser included offense which authorizes the imposition of a bad conduct or dishonorable discharge and they must indicate that they have been briefed and understand the...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2001 | 2001060994C070421
The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein. APPLICANT REQUESTS: That his undesirable discharge (UD) be upgraded to an honorable discharge. Carl W. S. Chun Director, Army Board for Correction of Military RecordsINDEXCASE IDAR2001060994SUFFIXRECONDATE BOARDED20020207TYPE OF DISCHARGE(UD)DATE OF DISCHARGE19750902DISCHARGE AUTHORITYAR635-200DISCHARGE REASONA71.00BOARD DECISION(DENY)REVIEW AUTHORITYISSUES 1.144.71002.3.4.5.6.