APPLICANT REQUESTS: That his discharge under other than honorable conditions (UOTHC) be upgraded.
APPLICANT STATES: His contentions were not submitted.
EVIDENCE OF RECORD: The applicant's military records show:
He was born on 19 February 1971. He completed 12 years of formal education. On 8 August 1989, the applicant enlisted in the Regular Army For 4 years. His Armed Forces Qualification Test score was 58 (Category III). He completed the required training and was awarded military occupational specialty 19K10 (Armor Crewman). The highest grade he achieved was pay grade E-3.
On 10 September 1992, court-martial charges were preferred against the applicant for stealing a protective mask property of the United States Government and for making a false statement.
On 15 September 1992, after consulting with legal counsel the applicant voluntarily requested a discharge under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 10, for the good of the service in lieu of trial by court-martial. The applicant also acknowledged that by submitting the request for discharge he was admitting his guilt of the charges that were preferred against him. The applicant was advised of the effects of a discharge under other than honorable conditions and that he might be deprived of many or all Army and Veterans Administration benefits. He was afforded the opportunity to submit statements in his behalf, but declined to do so.
On 23 September 1992, the appropriate authority approved his request and directed the issuance of a discharge UOTHC. On 9 October 1992, the applicant was discharged, in pay grade E-1, under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 10, for the good of service with a discharge UOTHC. He had completed 3 years, 2 months and 2 days of creditable active service. He was awarded the Army Commendation Medal, the Army Achievement Medal, the National Defense Service Medal, the Southwest Asia Service Medal with three bronze service stars, the Kuwait Liberation Medal and the Army Service Ribbon.
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 submit a request for discharge for the good of the service in lieu of trial by court-martial. The request may be submitted at any time after charges have been preferred and must include the individual's admission of guilt. Although an honorable or general discharge is authorized, a discharge under other than honorable conditions is normally considered appropriate.
On 23 February 1996, the Army Discharge Review Board denied the applicants request for an upgrade of his discharge.
DISCUSSION: Considering all the evidence, allegations, and information presented by the applicant, together with the evidence of record, applicable law and regulations, and advisory opinion(s), 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
2. The applicant's voluntary request for separation under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 10, for the good of the service, to avoid trial by court-martial, was administratively correct and in conformance with applicable regulations. There is no indication that the request was made under coercion or duress.
3. In view of the foregoing, there is no basis for granting the applicants 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
Karl F. Schneider
Acting Director
ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080014942
In his request for discharge, the applicant indicated that he understood that by requesting discharge, he was admitting guilt to the charges against him or of a lesser included offense that also authorized the imposition of a bad conduct discharge or a discharge under other than honorable conditions. The DD Form 214 he was issued at the time of his discharge shows he was discharged for the good of the service with a character of service of UOTHC. In order to justify correction of a...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090008957
On 6 May 1993, the applicant was discharged accordingly. There is no evidence showing the applicant applied to the Army Discharge Review Board (ADRB) for an upgrade of his discharge within that board's 15-year statute of limitations. As a result, his overall record of service did not support the issue of a GD by the separation authority at the time of his discharge nor does it support an upgrade of his discharge at this time.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | 20110004735
Application for correction of military records (with supporting documents provided, if any). THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE: 1. The applicant requests, in effect, that his under other than honorable conditions (UOTHC) discharge be changed to "for the benefit of."
ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | 20110017153
The applicant requests an upgrade of his under other than honorable conditions (UOTHC) discharge to an honorable discharge. The evidence shows his chain of command supported his request and he was discharged in lieu of trial by court-martial under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 10. The characterization of service for this type of discharge is normally UOTHC and the evidence shows he was aware of that prior to requesting discharge.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2013 | 20130014210
b. he doesn't believe that during his discharge from the service his leadership considered his two prior honorable discharges and award of the Army Good Conduct Medal for his honorable and faithful service. He stated he was requesting an honorable discharge because he was a benefit to the Army, was a good Soldier for 5 years and 11 months prior to encountering emotional personal problems. It appears the separation authority determined the applicant's overall service during his last...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090017856
There is no indication that the applicant applied to the Army Discharge Review Board for an upgrade of his discharge within that board's 15 year statute of limitations. The applicants DD Form 214 shows he was discharged under the provisions of chapter 10, Army Regulation 635-200, for the good of the service, in lieu of trial by court-martial. Absent evidence to the contrary, the applicant's UOTHC discharge is appropriate and the evidence does not support an upgrade to a GD or an HD.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | 20110025199
IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 21 June 2012 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20110025199 THE BOARD CONSIDERED THE FOLLOWING EVIDENCE: 1. He acknowledged that he was guilty of the charges or lesser included charges and that if the request was accepted he could receive a discharge under other than honorable conditions. Although an honorable or general discharge is authorized, a discharge under other than honorable conditions is normally considered appropriate.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140007486
Subsequent to receiving this legal counsel, he voluntarily requested discharge for the good of the service under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations Enlisted Personnel), chapter 10. a. On 16 August 2002, the Army Discharge Review Board denied the applicant's request to upgrade his UOTHC. Based on this record of indiscipline, his service clearly did not meet the standards of acceptable conduct and performance of duty for Army personnel.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2013 | 20130011691
THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE: 1. His service was exemplary during his assignment in Vietnam and during his 22 years in the Army. The separation authority approved the applicant's request for discharge under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 10, for the good of the service in lieu of trial by court-martial with a UOTHC discharge.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | 20110017393
The applicant requests an upgrade of his under other than honorable conditions (UOTHC) discharge to an honorable or general discharge. He voluntarily submitted a request for discharge for the good of the service in lieu of trial by court-martial. The characterization of service for this type of discharge is normally UOTHC and the evidence shows he was aware of that prior to requesting discharge.