RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
IN THE CASE OF:
BOARD DATE: 21 November 2006
DOCKET NUMBER: AR20060007426
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.
| |Mr. Carl W. S. Chun | |Director |
| |Ms. Wanda L. Waller | |Analyst |
The following members, a quorum, were present:
| |Mr. Thomas Pagan | |Chairperson |
| |Mr. Peter Fisher | |Member |
| |Ms. Laverne Douglas | |Member |
The Board considered the following evidence:
Exhibit A - Application for correction of military records.
Exhibit B - Military Personnel Records (including advisory opinion,
if any).
THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE:
1. The applicant requests, in effect, that clemency be granted in the form
of a discharge upgrade.
2. The applicant states that his discharge was too harsh of a penalty for
going absent without leave (AWOL). He contends that with a bad conduct
discharge he cannot get the medical attention that he needs.
3. The applicant provides a Senior Support Service Membership card and a
Colorado identification card.
CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:
1. The applicant enlisted on 1 August 1978 for a period of 4 years. He
successfully completed basic combat training and advanced individual
training in military occupational specialty 76P (stock control specialist).
2. On 15 November 1978, nonjudicial punishment was imposed against the
applicant for failure to repair. His punishment consisted of a forfeiture
of pay (suspended), restriction, and extra duty.
3. On 2 May 1979, nonjudicial punishment was imposed against the applicant
for violating a lawful general regulation. His punishment consisted of a
forfeiture of pay and restriction.
4. On 11 May 1979, nonjudicial punishment was imposed against the
applicant for breaking restriction. His punishment consisted of a
reduction to E-1, a forfeiture of pay, restriction (suspended), and extra
duty.
5. On 23 May 1979, in accordance with his pleas, the applicant was
convicted by a summary court-martial of three specifications of failure to
repair, three specifications of being AWOL (for one day, 10 May 1979; from
12 May 1979 to 14 May 1979; and from 15 May 1979 to 18 May 1979), breaking
restriction, possessing marijuana, possessing a false military pass, and
disobeying two lawful orders. He was sentenced to be confined at hard
labor for 30 days and to forfeit $279. On 23 May 1979, the convening
authority approved the sentence.
6. On 26 June 1979, nonjudicial punishment was imposed against the
applicant for possessing marijuana, breaking restriction, and disobeying a
lawful command. His punishment consisted of a forfeiture of pay,
restriction, and extra duty.
7. The applicant went AWOL on 6 November 1979.
8. On 16 November 1979, the applicant was tried in absentia and convicted
by a special court-martial of being AWOL from 30 June 1979 to 9 October
1979. He was sentenced to be confined at hard labor for 5 months, to
forfeit $200 pay per month for a period of 5 months, and to be discharged
from the service with a bad conduct discharge. On 15 February 1980, the
convening authority approved the sentence.
9. The applicant returned to military control on 23 April 1980. He went
AWOL again on 25 April 1980 and returned to military control on 3 May 1981.
10. The decision of the U.S. Army Court of Military Review is not in the
available records. However, orders, dated 4 May 1981, show the sentence
was affirmed and the bad conduct discharge was ordered to be executed.
11. Accordingly, the applicant was discharged with a bad conduct discharge
on
4 May 1981 under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 11, as
a result of a court-martial. He had served 10 months and 20 days of total
active service with 674 days of lost time due to AWOL and confinement.
12. Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for separation
of enlisted personnel. Chapter 11 of this regulation, in effect at the
time, states 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.
13. Section 1552(f), Title 10, United States Code states that the Army
Board for Correction of Military Records can only review records of court-
martial and related administrative records to correct a record to
accurately reflect action taken by reviewing authorities under the Uniform
Code of Military Justice or to take clemency action.
14. Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 3-7a, provides that an honorable
discharge is a separation with honor and entitles the recipient to benefits
provided by law. The honorable characterization is appropriate when the
quality of the member’s service generally has met the standards of
acceptable conduct and performance of duty for Army personnel (emphasis
added), or is otherwise so meritorious that any other characterization
would be clearly inappropriate.
15. Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 3-7b, provides that a general
discharge is a separation from the Army under honorable conditions. When
authorized, it is issued to a Soldier whose military record is satisfactory
but not sufficiently meritorious to warrant an honorable discharge. A
characterization of under honorable conditions may be issued only when the
reason for the Soldier’s separation specifically allows such
characterization.
DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:
1. A discharge is not upgraded for the purpose of obtaining Department of
Veterans Affairs benefits.
2. The applicant’s record of service included, in addition to the special
court-martial that resulted in his bad conduct discharge, four nonjudicial
punishments, one summary court-martial conviction, and 674 days of lost
time. He was tried in absentia and discharged with a bad conduct discharge
for a 101-day AWOL period. As a result, his record of service was not
satisfactory and did not meet the standards of acceptable conduct and
performance of duty for Army personnel.
BOARD VOTE:
________ ________ ________ GRANT FULL RELIEF
________ ________ ________ GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF
________ ________ ________ GRANT FORMAL HEARING
TP_____ __PF____ ___LD___ DENY APPLICATION
BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION:
The Board determined that the evidence presented does not demonstrate the
existence of a probable error or injustice. Therefore, the Board
determined that the overall merits of this case are insufficient as a basis
for correction of the records of the individual concerned.
___Thomas Pagan_______
CHAIRPERSON
INDEX
|CASE ID |AR20060007426 |
|SUFFIX | |
|RECON | |
|DATE BOARDED |20061121 |
|TYPE OF DISCHARGE |BCD |
|DATE OF DISCHARGE |19810504 |
|DISCHARGE AUTHORITY |AR 635-200 Chapter 11 |
|DISCHARGE REASON |As a result of court-martial |
|BOARD DECISION |NC |
|REVIEW AUTHORITY | |
|ISSUES 1. |144.0000 |
|2. | |
|3. | |
|4. | |
|5. | |
|6. | |
-----------------------
[pic]
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002080134C070215
The record contains no evidence that he was ever punished for this offense. On 28 January 1987, the Army Discharge Review Board denied the applicant’s request for clemency The available records contains no medical evidence and the applicant has provided no evidence that demonstrates he suffers from an illness or an injury that was either incurred in, or aggravated as a result of his military service.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2004 | 2004100765C070208
The Board considered the following evidence: Exhibit A - Application for correction of military records. On 19 November 1981, the Army Discharge Review Board (ADRB) denied the applicant’s request for a general discharge. Section 1552(f), Title 10, United States Code states that the Army Board for Correction of Military Records can only review records of court- martial and related administrative records to correct a record to accurately reflect action taken by reviewing authorities under...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080014369
This form further shows the applicant's character of service as bad conduct discharge and that he completed 3 years, 6 months, and 21 days of creditable military service. There is no indication in the applicant's records that he petitioned the Army Discharge Review Board for an upgrade of his discharge within that Board's 15-year statute of limitations. Conviction and discharge were effected in accordance with applicable laws and regulation, and the discharge appropriately characterized...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090020162
This provision of law also allows the Army Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR) to excuse an applicants failure to timely file within the 3-year statute of limitations if the ABCMR determines it would be in the interest of justice to do so. On 31 March 1981, the convening authority approved a lesser sentence of confinement at hard labor for 45 days, a forfeiture of $334.00 pay per month for 6 months, and a bad conduct discharge, and except for that part of the sentence...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | 20110010310
Conviction and discharge were effected in accordance with applicable law and regulations, and the discharge appropriately characterizes the misconduct for which the applicant was convicted. Accordingly, his punishment was not disproportionate to the offenses for which he was convicted and he has failed to show sufficient evidence or reasons to warrant an upgrade of his discharge based on clemency. As a result, clemency is not warranted in this case.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2004 | 2004099943C070208
The Board considered the following evidence: Exhibit A - Application for correction of military records. Even if he had not been recommended for separation under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 14, there appears to have been no basis for a medical discharge. Evidence of record shows the same SSN was used at the time of the applicant's enlistment and his discharge from the Army.
ARMY | DRB | CY2005 | 20050000823C070206
The applicant requests upgrade of his bad conduct discharge to an honorable discharge. On 21 April 1981, the military judge sentenced the applicant to reduction to pay grade E-1, forfeiture of $250.00 per month for four months, confinement at hard labor for 75 days, and to be discharged from the service with a bad conduct discharge. Therefore, there is no basis to grant clemency in the form of an honorable discharge.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2005 | 20050000823C070206
The applicant requests upgrade of his bad conduct discharge to an honorable discharge. On 21 April 1981, the military judge sentenced the applicant to reduction to pay grade E-1, forfeiture of $250.00 per month for four months, confinement at hard labor for 75 days, and to be discharged from the service with a bad conduct discharge. Therefore, there is no basis to grant clemency in the form of an honorable discharge.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2005 | 20050000823C070206
The applicant requests upgrade of his bad conduct discharge to an honorable discharge. On 21 April 1981, the military judge sentenced the applicant to reduction to pay grade E-1, forfeiture of $250.00 per month for four months, confinement at hard labor for 75 days, and to be discharged from the service with a bad conduct discharge. Therefore, there is no basis to grant clemency in the form of an honorable discharge.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2005 | 20050004334C070206
The applicant’s military records are incomplete; however, the available records show that he enlisted in the Regular Army on 24 August 1979. 3. Review of the applicant’s record of service shows that he had various incidents of misconduct, 3 nonjudicial punishments, 1 court-martial and 128 days of lost time due to AWOL and confinement. Records indicate that the applicant was 19 years old at the time his discharge.