Search Decisions

Decision Text

ARMY | BCMR | CY2001 | 2001051441C070420
Original file (2001051441C070420.rtf) Auto-classification: Approved
PROCEEDINGS


         IN THE CASE OF:
        

         BOARD DATE: 5 April 2001
         DOCKET NUMBER: AR2001051441


         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
Mrs. Nancy Amos Analyst


The following members, a quorum, were present:

Ms. June Hajjar Chairperson
Ms. Celia L. Adolphi Member
Mr. Harry B. Oberg Member

         The applicant and counsel if any, did not appear before the Board.

         The Board considered the following evidence:

         Exhibit A - Application for correction of military
records
         Exhibit B - Military Personnel Records (including
         advisory opinion, if any)

FINDINGS :

1. The applicant has exhausted or the Board has waived the requirement for exhaustion of all administrative remedies afforded by existing law or regulations.


2. The applicant requests that his discharge under other than honorable conditions (UOTHC) be upgraded.

3. The applicant states that he was told by the Judge Advocate General’s officer that he could request an upgrade of his discharge after 3 years. He provides no supporting evidence.

4. The applicant’s military records show that after having had prior service in the U. S. Army Reserve, he enlisted in the Regular Army on 5 July 1979. He was promoted to Sergeant, E-5 on 21 November 1981. He was honorably discharged on 13 January 1982 for the purpose of immediately reenlisting on 14 January 1982 for 6 years.

5. On 17 February 1984, court-martial charges were preferred against the applicant charging him with being absent without leave (AWOL) for the period 22 November 1983 to on or about 16 February 1984.

6. On 27 February 1984, 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 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 elected to submit a statement in his own behalf. He stated that he went AWOL while en route to Germany because his mother had high blood pressure problems and had a nervous breakdown and his sisters wanted her to go to a mental institution. He did not want his mother in a situation like that. He tried to take a 45-day leave before leaving for Germany so he could take care of the problem but his commander and first sergeant said “no.” He also was supposed to start his leave on 14 October 1983 but they did not let him sign out until 20 October 1983, giving him less time to solve his problem.

7. On 13 March 1984, the appropriate authority approved the request and directed the applicant receive a discharge under other than honorable conditions.

8. On 17 March 1984, the applicant waived a separation physical examination.

9. On 5 April 1984, the applicant was discharged with a discharge UOTHC, in pay grade E-1, under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 10, discharge in lieu of trial by court-martial. He had completed 4 years, 6 months, and 7 days of creditable active service for that period and had 85 days of lost time.

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 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. A discharge under other than honorable conditions is normally considered appropriate.

11. The U. S. Army does not have, nor has it ever had, a policy to automatically upgrade discharges. Each case is decided on its own merits when an applicant requests a change in discharge. Changes may be warranted if the Board determines that the characterization of service or the reason for discharge or both were improper or inequitable. The Defense Discharge Review Standards specifically stated that no factors should be established which would require automatic change or denial of a change in discharge.

12. The Department of Veterans Affairs (VA), in determining qualifications for benefits administered by that agency, generally holds that an individual who accepts a discharge prior to completion of his complete term of obligated service may not be eligible for benefits unless or until the VA or the Service Department determines that the early discharge amounted to a complete and unconditional separation from the service.

CONCLUSIONS:

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 this 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. At this late date the Board will not second-guess the commander’s decision not to grant the applicant 45 days leave or to change the start date of his leave. While the Board sympathizes with his reasons for wanting a long leave to help his mother, the Board notes that his AWOL for this time totaled 85 days, more than the 45 days leave he was requesting. In addition, the applicant was a noncommissioned officer who should have known there were other ways to attempt to resolve his problem. There is no evidence to show he requested a compassionate reassignment or a temporary deferment, administrative actions which could have been requested at any time prior to his departure for Germany.

4. While the Board takes cognizance of the applicant’s stated personal problems, this factor does not warrant the relief requested and it would not be appropriate to change the records to show that the applicant was discharged honorably from the reenlistment commencing on 14 January 1982. However, it appears that his honorable discharge of 13 January 1982 should be considered as having been issued as a complete and unconditional separation.

5. The circumstances of the applicant’s honorable discharge on 13 January 1982 may work an injustice upon him by depriving him of consideration for certain VA benefits or by failing to acknowledge that his preceding period of service was honorable.

6. In view of the foregoing, the applicant’s records should be corrected as recommended below.

RECOMMENDATION:

1. That all of the Department of the Army records related to this case be corrected by showing that the applicant was eligible for a complete and unconditional separation from the military service at the time of his honorable discharge on 13 January 1982.

2. That so much of the application as is in excess of the foregoing be denied.

BOARD VOTE:

__jh____ __cla___ __hbo___ GRANT AS STATED IN RECOMMENDATION

________ ________ ________ GRANT FORMAL HEARING

________ ________ ________ DENY APPLICATION



                           June Hajjar
                  ______________________
                  CHAIRPERSON




INDEX

CASE ID AR2001051441
SUFFIX
RECON
DATE BOARDED 20010405
TYPE OF DISCHARGE UOTHC
DATE OF DISCHARGE 19840405
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY AR 635-200, ch 10
DISCHARGE REASON A70.00
BOARD DECISION (GRANT)
REVIEW AUTHORITY
ISSUES 1. 110.00
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.


Similar Decisions

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2001 | 2001065178C070421

    Original file (2001065178C070421.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Accordingly, on 2 November 1984, the applicant was discharged from the Army after completing 5 years, 3 months, and 23 days of creditable military service and accruing 293 days of lost time. 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...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2001 | 2001060360C070421

    Original file (2001060360C070421.rtf) Auto-classification: Approved

    On 5 December 1981, the applicant submitted a DA Form 4187 (Personnel Action) for a hardship discharge. On 11 February 1983, the applicant’s unit commander recommended that his request for discharge be approved with a UOTHC discharge. There is nothing in the applicant's record, and he has provided nothing, that indicates his recruiter promised him he would be allowed to continue his boxing career in the military.

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2003 | 2003088746C070403

    Original file (2003088746C070403.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Effective 29 November 1981, the applicant was issued an Honorable Discharge Certificate after completion of 2 years, 9 months, and 9 days service based on an immediate reenlistment on 30 November 1981 in the pay grade of E-3. There is no evidence of record that the applicant applied to the Army Discharge Review Board for an upgrade of his discharge within the 15-year time limit. The Board determined that the evidence presented and the merits of this case are insufficient to warrant the...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | 20110001390

    Original file (20110001390.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    In a statement, dated 1 April 2010, he states he had a prior period of honorable service from February 1976 to September 1978. He was issued a temporary physical profile for back pain on 21 September 1979. On 17 February 1984, the separation authority approved the applicant's voluntary request for discharge and directed that he be furnished an under other than honorable conditions discharge.

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2001 | 2001059002C070421

    Original file (2001059002C070421.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein. On 29 March 1984 the appropriate authority approved the applicant’s request for discharge and directed that he be discharged under other than honorable conditions. While the applicant may have been experiencing personal problems at the time, there is no indication in the available records and the applicant has provided no evidence to support his contention that he sought...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2003 | 2003086696C070212

    Original file (2003086696C070212.rtf) Auto-classification: Approved

    He recommended approval of his request with a discharge under other than honorable conditions. However, taking into consideration that the applicant's commanders at the personnel control facility were not aware of the applicant's record of service, coupled with the applicant's stated desire to leave the Army because of personal difficulties, his discharge under other than honorable conditions was perceptible. The applicant's DD Form 214 should be corrected to show award of the Army Good...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100013204

    Original file (20100013204.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    In his voluntary request for discharge, the applicant indicated he understood by requesting discharge that the imposition of a bad conduct or dishonorable discharge was authorized. On 5 April 1982, the separation authority approved the applicant's request for discharge and directed the issuance of a DD Form 794A (Other than Honorable Conditions Discharge Certificate). The evidence of record does not support the applicant's request for an upgrade of his UOTHC discharge to a GD.

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140001772

    Original file (20140001772.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE: 1. On 18 April 1985, he was discharged from the Army. Soldiers were, and still are, provided counsel and advised of the reason for the discharge, the type of discharge they could receive and the results of the issuance of such a discharge, the rights available to them, and the effects of waiving those rights in discharge proceedings.

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140013526

    Original file (20140013526 .txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant requests: a. correction of his records to show he was medically discharged or b. an upgrade of his discharge under other than honorable conditions to general under honorable conditions. The applicant provides: * selected service medical records * Army Review Boards Agency correspondence, dated 2 July 2014, with DD Form 149 (Application for Correction of Military Record under the Provisions of Title 10, U.S. Code, Section 1552), dated 29 July 2013, with attachments – * letter...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100016231

    Original file (20100016231.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE: 1. The applicant states he returned to the United States from an assignment in Berlin, GE and he had 45 days of leave en route to his new assignment at Fort Lewis, WA. The record shows he reported to Fort Lewis and he was assigned to Company B, 2nd Battalion, 47th Infantry on 4 April 1983.