| Mr. Carl W. S. Chun | Director | |
| Ms. Rosa M. Chandler | Analyst |
| Mr. Fred N. Eichorn | Chairperson | |
| Mr. John E. Denning | Member | |
| Ms. Terry L. Placek | Member |
APPLICANT REQUESTS: That his undesirable discharge (UOTHC) be upgraded to a fully honorable discharge.
APPLICANT STATES: In effect, that he is requesting that his discharge be upgraded so that he may be able to obtain Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) benefits for a service-connected disability.
EVIDENCE OF RECORD: The applicant's military records show:
That on 8 January 1985, he voluntarily enlisted in the United States Army Reserve (USAR) for a period of 8 years and training in military occupational specialty (MOS) 52G (Transmission and Distribution Specialist).
On 31 January 1985, the applicant was ordered to active duty for training. On 5 February 1985, he reported to Fort Leonard Wood, Missouri for basic training. He completed basic training and, on 6 April 1985, he was assigned to Fort Sill, Oklahoma for advanced individual training. On 6 June 1985, he departed his unit at Fort Sill in an absent without leave (AWOL) status and he remained AWOL until he returned to military control at the Personnel Control Facility (PCF), Fort Hood, Texas on 20 August 1985. He was returned to Fort Sill on 22 August 1985 and assigned to that installation's PCF. He never completed the requirements for award of MOS 52G.
The applicant's records do not contain all of the facts and circumstances surrounding the discharge process. However, an undated DA Form
2496 (Disposition Form) shows that the applicant was charged with being AWOL from 6 June-20 August 1985. He consulted with legal counsel and requested discharge for the good of the service in lieu of trial by court-martial under the provisions of chapter 10, Army Regulation 635-200. He was advised that he could receive a UOTHC discharge. He authenticated a statement with his own signature in which he acknowledged that he understood the ramifications of a chapter
10 separation and the effects of receiving a UOTHC discharge. He did not submit a statement in his own behalf.
On 26 August 1985, the applicant was voluntarily placed on excess leave pending discharge under the provisions of chapter 10, Army Regulation 635-200. His records contain a properly constituted DD Form 214 which 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 with a UOTHC on 18 January 1985. It also shows that he completed 6 months and 4 days of active military service and had 73 days of lost time.
The applicant petitioned the Army Discharge Review Board (ADRB) seeking a discharge upgrade. On 17 January 2001, the ADRB notified the applicant that his application was not filed within that board's 15-year statute of limitations and would not be considered.
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 was authorized, a UOTHC discharge was then 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 this requirement.
2. The available records show that the applicant committed an AWOL offense at Fort Sill which was punishable under the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) with a punitive discharge. He consulted with legal counsel and was informed that he could receive a UOTHC discharge. He was also informed of the consequences of receiving such a discharge. He voluntarily requested separation under the provisions of Army of chapter 10, Army Regulation 635-200, for the good of the service, to avoid trial by court-martial. In doing so, he admitted guilt to the stipulated offense under the UCMJ. There is no evidence in the record, nor has the applicant presented any, to indicate that the request was made under coercion or duress; therefore, the Board presumes regularity in the discharge process.
3. The applicant's conduct was inconsistent with the Army’s standards for acceptable personal conduct and his overall quality of service does not warrant an upgrade of his discharge.
4. No medical records were available. However, the available records contain no evidence that indicates the applicant had a medical condition or injury that rendered him medically unfit and justified physical disability processing. Eligibility for veteran's benefits (to include VA medical benefits) does not fall within the purview of this Board. Furthermore, the Board does not grant relief solely for the purpose of gaining VA benefits.
5. 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
_fne ____ __jed____ _slp____ DENY APPLICATION
INDEX
| CASE ID | AR2001052914 |
| SUFFIX | |
| RECON | |
| DATE BOARDED | 20010913 |
| TYPE OF DISCHARGE | (UD) |
| DATE OF DISCHARGE | 19851018 |
| DISCHARGE AUTHORITY | AR 635-200, CH10 |
| DISCHARGE REASON | A71.00 |
| BOARD DECISION | DENY |
| REVIEW AUTHORITY | |
| ISSUES 1. | 144.7100 |
| 2. | |
| 3. | |
| 4. | |
| 5. | |
| 6. |
ARMY | BCMR | CY2003 | 2003089505C070403
There is no evidence that the applicant ever applied to the Army Discharge Review Board for review of his discharge under that board's 15-year statute of limitations. The evidence also indicates that the applicant's assigned RE-code of RE-4 was appropriate at the time of separation and that it is still appropriate. The Board determined that the evidence presented and the merits of this case are insufficient to warrant the relief requested, and therefore, it would not be in the interest of...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002067039C070402
On 16 July 1979, the applicant departed his unit at Fort Stewart in an AWOL status and remained absent until he surrendered to military authorities at Fort Leonard Wood on 21 August 1979. On the same date, after consulting with counsel about his rights, the applicant requested discharge under the provisions of chapter 10, Army Regulation 635-200, for the good of the service in lieu of trial by court-martial. The Board noted the applicant's contentions; however, the Board found no evidence...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002083254C070215
The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein. There is no evidence in the available records to indicate that the applicant ever applied to the Army Discharge Review Board for an upgrade of his discharge within that board's 15-year statute of limitations. DISCUSSION : Considering all the evidence, allegations, and information presented by the applicant, together with the evidence of record, applicable law and...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080015930
THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE: 1. The applicant provides: a. There is no evidence of the applicants physical disability processing in the available record.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2001 | 2001065298C070421
This action was taken by Fort Bragg, in spite of the fact that the applicant had clearly been present for duty at the PCF, Fort Knox, for eight months and had successfully completed a rehabilitation program. A Personnel Action (DA Form 4187), dated 19 October 1999, prepared by the PCF, Fort Knox, changed the applicant’s duty status from present for duty to AWOL, effective 15 October 1999, and on 29 December 1999, the applicant returned to military control at the PCF, Fort Knox. However, it...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2005 | 20050000100C070206
The applicant provides: a. The applicant's mother states the applicant called her the night before she left the unit AWOL and complained that an individual in the unit had behaved inappropriately towards her. On 7 November 2002, the Army Discharge Review Board denied the applicant’s request for an upgrade of her discharge.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2001 | 2001061208C070421
The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein. The applicant requested discharge for the good of the service in lieu of trial by court-martial under the provisions of chapter 10, AR 635-200. The evidence of record shows the applicant was discharged under the provisions of chapter 10, AR 635-200, for the good of the service in lieu of trial by court-martial.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2001 | 2001063909C070421
The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein. EVIDENCE OF RECORD : The applicant's military records show: However, an Army Discharge Review Board (ADRB) Case Report and Directive, dated 15 February 1985, shows the applicant was charged with the above AWOL offense on 28 June 1983.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140011124
THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE: 1. On 1 March 1972, he requested discharge under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations - Enlisted Personnel), chapter 10, for the good of the service - in lieu of trial by court-martial. The DD Form 214 (Armed Forces of the United States Report of Transfer or Discharge) he was issued shows he was discharged under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 10 - for the good of the service in lieu of trial...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2001 | 2001065178C070421
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...