Title: APPLICANT REQUESTS: That his discharge under other than honorable conditions (UOTHC) be upgraded to honorable
Author: +

ABCMR Memorandum of                                                        AC97-11474
Consideration (cont)

APPLICANT REQUESTS:  That his discharge under other than honorable conditions (UOTHC) be upgraded to honorable.

APPLICANT STATES:  In effect, that he never had trouble with the law upon entering the service and his first year and a half stateside.  He has been a good citizen all his life.

COUNSEL CONTENDS:  Counsel makes no statement and submits no documents.

EVIDENCE OF RECORD:  The applicant’s military records show:

He enlisted in the Regular Army on 26 September 1975.  He completed basic training and advanced individual training and was awarded military occupational specialty 64C (Motor Transport Operator).  

On 1 April 1977, the applicant accepted non-judicial punishment (NJP) under Article 15, Uniform Code of Military Justice  (UCMJ) for failing to obey a lawful order from and being disrespectful towards his superior non-commissioned officer.

On 6 March 1978, the applicant accepted NJP under Article 15, UCMJ for unlawfully striking another in the face with his fist and then kicking him in the face.

On 27 June 1978, the applicant accepted NJP under Article 15, UCMJ for offering violence towards his superior officer.

The court-martial charges and the discharge proceedings packet are not available.

On 6 November 1978, he was discharged, in pay grade E-1, under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, Chapter 10, for the good of the service with a discharge UOTHC.  He had completed 3 years, 1 month and 11 days of creditable active service and had no lost time.

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.  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 the aforementioned requirement and, in the absence of evidence to the contrary, it is presumed that the discharge proceedings were conducted in accordance with law and regulations applicable at the time.

2.  Therefore, 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

                       DENY APPLICATION

                           Loren G. Harrell       
					      Director