| Mr. Carl W. S. Chun | Director | |
| Ms. Deborah L. Brantley | Senior Analyst |
| Mr. Stanley Kelley | Chairperson | |
| Mr. Raymond J. Wagner | Member | |
| Ms. Mae M. Bullock | Member |
APPLICANT REQUESTS: That his undesirable discharge be upgraded to a general discharge.
APPLICANT STATES: In effect, that he was drafted and was angry. He also states that he was young and had trouble with authority. He states that he did not realize that his discharge would "haunt [him] in his later years" and that it has "been a stigma for [him] all these years." He states that he has been a loyal citizen since his discharge and loves his country. He maintains that it would be in the interest of justice to upgrade his discharge. Beyond his self-authored statement, he submits no evidence in support of his request.
EVIDENCE OF RECORD: The applicant's military records show:
He was inducted on 11 May 1971 at the age of 19. He successfully completed basic combat training and received an excellent conduct and efficiency rating.
In September 1971 he was assigned to Fort Sill, Oklahoma, to undergo training as a field artilleryman. He was advanced to pay grade E-2 shortly after his arrival at Fort Sill and was awarded a field artillery specialty in November 1971.
In December 1971 the applicant commenced a series of AWOL (absent without leave) periods, which resulted in his being dropped from the rolls of the Army, conviction by a special court-martial, and punishment under Article 15 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice.
In June 1972, shortly after his release from confinement, which was part of the sentence resulting from his special court-martial action, the applicant again departed AWOL and was ultimately dropped from the rolls of the Army.
He returned to military control on 23 August 1972.
On 29 August 1972 the applicant's commander initiated action to administratively separate the applicant from active duty under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-212, for unfitness. The commander sited the applicant's more than 200 days of lost time and his negative attitude as the basis for the recommendation. He recommended the applicant be issued an undesirable discharge certificate.
The applicant acknowledged receipt of the proposed separation action, consulted with counsel, and waived his attendant rights. In his acknowledgement statement he indicated that he had been advised by his consulting counsel of the
basis for the contemplated action to accomplish his separation for unfitness. He also acknowledged that he understood that he could expect to encounter substantial prejudice in civilian life, and that he could be ineligible for many or all benefits as a veteran under both Federal and State laws as a result of the issuance of an undesirable discharge.
The commander's recommendation was approved on 15 September 1972 and on 16 September 1972 the applicant again departed AWOL. His discharged was executed in absentia on 21 September 1971. The applicant was discharged "under conditions other than honorable" and was issued an undesirable discharge certificate. He had 8 months and 20 days of creditable service and more than 230 days of lost time.
Army Regulation 635-212, in effect at the time, set forth the basic authority for the administrative separation of enlisted personnel. It provided for the separation for unfitness as a result of a variety of situations, including frequent incidents of a discreditable nature with civil or military authorities; drug addiction or the unauthorized use or possession of habit-forming drugs or marijuana; an established pattern of shirking; and an established pattern of dishonorable failure to pay just debts or to contribute adequate support to dependents. When separation for unfitness was warranted an undesirable discharge was 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 has submitted neither probative evidence nor a convincing argument in support of his request. His contention that his age, problem with authority, and anger at being inducted somehow justified or excused his behavior is without foundation. His successful completion of training and promotion to pay grade E-2, clearly indicated that the applicant was capable of honorable service.
2. 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.
3. He has submitted no evidence which would serve as a basis to upgrade his discharge as a matter of equity.
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
__SK ___ __RJW__ __MMB__ DENY APPLICATION
| CASE ID | AR2003088796 |
| SUFFIX | |
| RECON | YYYYMMDD |
| DATE BOARDED | 20031106 |
| 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 | 20070013665
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 4 April 2008 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20070013665 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. DA Form 2496, dated 16 February 1972, shows that the applicant's commander requested that he be transferred to another unit for the purpose of rehabilitation. There is no documentary evidence in the applicant's record...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | 20110000711
The separation authority's approval memorandum is not available for review; however, his records contain discharge orders and a duly-constituted DD Form 214 that shows he was discharged on 3 November 1972 under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-212 by reason of unfitness with a character of service of under other than honorable conditions. Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations) sets forth the basic policy for the separation of enlisted personnel. Army Regulation 635-200,...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080014497
On 17 July 1972, the separation authority waived any further rehabilitation efforts, approved the applicants discharge under the provisions of AR 635-212 by reason of unfitness, and directed the applicant be furnished an Undesirable Discharge Certificate. The evidence of record shows that the applicant had two instances of AWOL while still in AIT, including a lengthy period of 238 days. Further, the applicant's discharge accurately reflects his overall record of service.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090011609
On 13 January 1969, the separation authority approved the applicants discharge under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-212 by reason of unfitness and directed the applicant be furnished an Undesirable Discharge Certificate. Accordingly, on 23 January 1969, the applicant was discharged from the Army. The DD Form 214 he was issued at the time of his discharge confirms he was discharged with a character of service of under other than honorable conditions and issued an Undesirable...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2001 | 2001064400C070421
The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein. In June 1970 the applicant's commander initiated action to administratively separate the applicant from active duty, under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-212 (unfitness), and recommended the applicant receive an undesirable discharge. The applicant’s contention that he was suffering from PTSD at the time he departed AWOL is not supported by any evidence submitted...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100001061
The applicant states he was discharged because he could not get along with an officer and that his service was honorable up until the last few months. The applicant's request that his undesirable discharge should be upgraded was carefully considered; however, there is insufficient evidence to grant relief. However, his record contains a properly-constituted DD Form 214 that shows he was discharged on 30 May 1972 under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-212 by reason of unfitness with an...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100017780
The applicant requests, in effect, that his undesirable discharge (UD) which was upgraded to a general discharge (GD), under the Department of Defense (DOD) Special Discharge Review Program (SDRP), be upgraded to honorable. A memorandum, dated 21 October 1971, Subject: Elimination Proceedings under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-212, shows that a board of officers was directed to investigate his case to determine if he should be discharged from the service. He applied to the Army...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2012 | 20120004558
The applicant requests an upgrade of his "dishonorable discharge" (i.e., his undesirable discharge) to a general discharge. The applicant did not provide any evidence. This regulation also prescribed that an undesirable discharge was normally issued unless the particular circumstances warranted a general or an honorable discharge.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002071598C070402
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 the application was filed within the time established by statute, and if not, whether it would be in the interest of justice to waive the failure to timely file. The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein. There is no evidence that the...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090020740
A Soldier must be absent without leave (AWOL) at least 180 days to be classified as a deserter, he was AWOL 153 days. Army Regulation 625-200 (Personnel Separations), paragraph 3-7b, provides that a general discharge is a separation from the Army under honorable conditions. Although his record shows he was dropped from the rolls and carried in a desertion status, he was correctly discharged under Army Regulation 635-212 for unfitness.