| Mr. Carl W. S. Chun | Director | |
| Ms. Beverly A. Young | Analyst |
| Ms. June Hajjar | Chairperson | |
| Ms. Celia L. Adolphi | Member | |
| Mr. Harry B. Oberg | Member |
APPLICANT REQUESTS: That his discharge under other than honorable conditions (UOTHC) be upgraded to honorable.
APPLICANT STATES: That he had to take care of his seriously ill mother who was an amputee and unable to work. After his father went to Florida to live, he claims that he was the only son and had to become the head of household. In support of his application, he submits a DD Form 293 (Application for the Review of Discharge or Dismissal from the Armed Forces of the United States), dated 5 November 2000.
EVIDENCE OF RECORD: The applicant's military records show:
The applicant enlisted in the Regular Army on 12 January 1968 for a period of 3 years. He completed training as a field artillery crewman and was assigned to Korea from 1 June 1968 through 2 July 1969.
On 5 August 1968, the applicant received nonjudicial punishment for being found asleep on post. He was reduced to the grade of PV2, restricted to the compound for 14 days and 14 days extra duty to run concurrently, and forfeiture of $28.00 for 1 month.
On 19 November 1969, the applicant was convicted by a special court-martial for being absent without leave (AWOL) from 7 October 1969 to 31 October 1969. He was sentenced to confinement at hard labor for 2 months and reduction to the grade of PV1.
On 22 December 1969, the applicant was convicted again by a special court-martial for being AWOL from 19 November 1969 to 24 November 1969. He was sentenced to confinement at hard labor for 2 months.
On 25 March 1976, charges were preferred against the applicant for being AWOL from 20 February 1970 to 10 March 1976.
On 29 March 1976, the applicant consulted with legal counsel and voluntarily requested discharge for the good of the service in lieu of trial by court-martial under the provisions of chapter 10 of Army Regulation 635-200. In doing so, he admitted guilt to the offense charged and acknowledged that he might encounter substantial prejudice in civilian life and that he might be ineligible for many or all benefits administered by the Veterans Administration (VA) if an undesirable discharge were issued. The applicant submitted a statement in his own behalf.
On 30 March 1976, the separation authority approved the applicant’s request for discharge and directed that an Undesirable Discharge Certificate be issued. The applicant was discharged on 7 April 1976 under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 10. He had 1 year, 9 months, and 23 days of creditable service and 2,346 days of lost time due to AWOL and confinement.
Prior to discharge, the applicant underwent a physical examination and was found fit for separation with a physical profile of 111111.
There is no indication in the available records to show that the applicant applied to the Army Discharge Review Board within its 15-year statute of limitations.
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. However, at the time of the applicant's separation the regulation provided for the issuance of an undesirable discharge.
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'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.
2. The applicant's request for a chapter 10 discharge, even after appropriate and proper consultation with a military lawyer, tends to show he wished to avoid the court-martial and the punitive discharge that he might have received.
3. In view of the applicant's numerous acts of indiscipline, it does not appear that his undesirable discharge was too severe.
4. The contentions of the applicant have been noted by the Board; however, the applicant's personal problems are not sufficiently mitigating to warrant an upgrade of his discharge.
5. Therefore, the discharge process was in accordance with applicable law and regulations and the applicant's service was appropriately characterized considering all the facts of the case.
6. 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.
7. 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
JH______ CLA_____ HBO_____ DENY APPLICATION
| CASE ID | AR2001051452 |
| SUFFIX | |
| RECON | YYYYMMDD |
| DATE BOARDED | 20010405 |
| TYPE OF DISCHARGE | UOTHC |
| DATE OF DISCHARGE | 19760407 |
| DISCHARGE AUTHORITY | AR635-200. . . |
| DISCHARGE REASON | For the good of the Service – in lieu of trial by court-martial |
| BOARD DECISION | DENY |
| REVIEW AUTHORITY | |
| ISSUES 1. | 110.0000 |
| 2. | |
| 3. | |
| 4. | |
| 5. | |
| 6. |
ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | 20110001825
On 2 September 1970, the separation authority approved the applicant's request for discharge and directed the issuance of an undesirable discharge. However, the evidence shows he received five special court-martial convictions for AWOL during his active duty service. Since his record of service included five special court-martial convictions and 840 days of lost time, his record of service was not satisfactory.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100009893
On 22 January 1971, the separation authority approved the applicants request for discharge and directed that he be furnished an Undesirable Discharge Certificate. The evidence of record shows the applicant was discharged with an undesirable discharge on 28 January 1971. Evidence of record shows he was awarded a clemency discharge in 1975 pursuant to PP 4313 of 16 September 1974.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2005 | 20050002304C070206
Michael Flynn | |Member | The Board considered the following evidence: Exhibit A - Application for correction of military records. On 21 May 1969, the separation authority approved the applicant's request for discharge and directed that he be furnished an undesirable discharge. Evidence of record also shows the applicant indicated in his request that he understood that he could be discharged under other than honorable conditions and furnished an Undesirable Discharge Certificate.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090015672
On 17 April 1970, the separation authority approved the applicants request for discharge and directed that he be furnished an undesirable discharge. The applicant was discharged with an undesirable discharge on 6 May 1970 under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 10, for the good of the service. _______ _ x_______ ___ CHAIRPERSON I certify that herein is recorded the true and complete record of the proceedings of the Army Board for Correction of Military Records in this case.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2006 | 20060010446
THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE: 1. Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 3-7, provides that a general discharge is a separation from the Army under honorable conditions. The applicants service record shows he received two special courts-martial for being AWOL on two separate occasions for over 200 days in addition to the AWOL which led to his separation.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090002901
BOARD DATE: 13 August 2009 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20090002901 THE BOARD CONSIDERED THE FOLLOWING EVIDENCE: 1. The applicant requests reconsideration of his previous requests for an upgrade of his undesirable discharge. Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2005 | 20050008709C070206
On 17 December 1973, the separation authority approved the applicant’s request for discharge and directed that he be issued an undesirable discharge. Accordingly, the applicant was discharged with an undesirable discharge on 19 December 1973 under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 10, for the good of the service. There is no evidence that the applicant applied to the Army Discharge Review Board for upgrade of his discharge within its 15-year statute of limitations.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080018209
On 5 August 1974, the separation authority approved the applicants request for discharge and directed that he be furnished an undesirable discharge. There is no evidence that the applicant applied to the Army Discharge Review Board for upgrade of his discharge within its 15-year statute of limitations. Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | 20110022743
THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE: 1. The applicant requests that his undesirable discharge be upgraded to an honorable discharge. There is no evidence in the available records to show that he applied to the Army Discharge Review Board (ADRB) for an upgrade of his discharge within that boards 15-year statute of limitations.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090012958
The applicant requests that his undesirable discharge be upgraded to honorable. On 6 October 1969, the separation authority approved the applicant's request for discharge and directed that he be furnished an undesirable discharge. ____________x_____________ CHAIRPERSON I certify that herein is recorded the true and complete record of the proceedings of the Army Board for Correction of Military Records in this case.