| Mr. Carl W. S. Chun | Director | |
| Mr. Vic Whitney | Analyst |
| Ms. Shirley Powell | Chairperson | |
| Ms. Regan K. Smith | Member | |
| Mr. John P. Infante | Member |
APPLICANT REQUESTS: That his discharge under other than honorable conditions be upgraded to honorable.
APPLICANT STATES: That his marriage problems caused a set back in his short career.
EVIDENCE OF RECORD: The applicant's military records show:
He enlisted and entered active duty on 17 July 1980. He was trained as a carpenter and continued his service through a reenlistment. He was promoted to the pay grade of E-5 effective 5 June 1983.
On 5 February 1985 he was punished under Article 15, UCMJ for driving while drunk. His punishment included a suspended one-grade reduction and a forfeiture of pay. On 14 March 1985 he was issued a general officer Letter of Reprimand for driving while intoxicated. On 31 October 1986 a local bar to reenlistment was imposed. The basis was his flagrant disregard to pay his just debts and inability to manage his personal affairs.
On 5 February 1987 the applicant was punished again under Article 15, UCMJ for issuing bad checks. The punishment imposed included reduction to the pay grade of E-4. He departed AWOL on 5 March 1987 and remained absent until 6 April 1987. On 8 April 1987 charges were preferred for the AWOL offense.
On 8 April 1987, after consulting with counsel, he requested discharge in lieu of trial by court-martial. In his request he acknowledged that he was guilty of the offense charged and could be issued a bad conduct or dishonorable discharge as a result of trial by court-martial. He also acknowledged that he might be deprived of many or all benefits under Federal and state law. The separation authority approved the request and directed reduction to the lowest enlisted grade and separation under other than honorable conditions.
The applicant was discharged effective 27 May 1987 under the authority of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 10. He had 3 years, 4 months, and 24 days creditable service and 32 days 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 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.
On 7 February 2001 the Army Discharge Review Board, in a unanimous decision, denied the applicant's 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, it is concluded:
1. The applicant's voluntary request for separation under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 10, 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. There is no indication that the request was made under coercion or duress.
2. The applicant's administrative separation was accomplished in compliance with applicable regulations with no indication of procedural errors that would tend to jeopardize his rights. The type of discharge directed and the reasons therefore were appropriate considering all the facts of the case.
3. 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.
4. 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
___sp__ ___rs____ __ji____ DENY APPLICATION
| CASE ID | AR2001052962 |
| SUFFIX | |
| RECON | |
| DATE BOARDED | 20010322 |
| TYPE OF DISCHARGE | UOTHC |
| DATE OF DISCHARGE | YYYYMMDD |
| DISCHARGE AUTHORITY | AR 635-200, CH 10 |
| DISCHARGE REASON | A71.00 |
| BOARD DECISION | DENY |
| REVIEW AUTHORITY | |
| ISSUES 1. | 110.02 |
| 2. | |
| 3. | |
| 4. | |
| 5. | |
| 6. |
ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090006907
The applicant requests, in effect, that his under other than honorable conditions discharge be upgraded to honorable. On 8 May 1987, the appropriate authority approved the applicant's request for discharge for the good of the service and directed that an Under Other Than Honorable Conditions Discharge Certificate be issued and that the applicant be reduced to pay grade E-1. Based on the available evidence, there is no basis for the upgrade of his discharge to either a fully honorable or a...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2003 | 2003088026C070403
I certify that hereinafter is recorded the record of consideration of the Army Board for Correction of Military Records in the case of the above-named individual. EVIDENCE OF RECORD : The applicant's military records show: On 14 May 1986, the Army Discharge Review Board denied the applicant’s request for an upgrade of his discharge.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2006 | 20060004607C070205
THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE: 1. The applicant requests, in effect, that his discharge under other than honorable conditions be upgraded to a general discharge. There is no evidence in the available records to show that he ever applied to the Army Discharge Review Board for an upgrade of his discharge within that board's 15-year statute of limitations.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100008118
The applicant requests that his discharge under other than honorable conditions be upgraded to a fully honorable discharge. The appropriate authority (a major general) approved his request on 22 December 1987 and directed that he be discharged under other than honorable conditions. He was 26 years of age at the time of his discharge.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2003 | 03095254C070212
THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE: 1. The applicant states that he requested discharge. The U.S. Court of Appeals, observing that applicants to the Army Discharge Review Board (ADRB) are by statute allowed 15 years to apply there, and that this Board's exhaustion requirement (Army Regulation 15-185, paragraph 2-8), effectively shortens that filing period, has determined that the 3 year limit on filing to the Army Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR) should...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080019500
The appropriate authority approved his request on 6 December 1989 and directed that he be discharged under other than honorable conditions. Paragraph 3-7b of Army Regulation 635-200 provides that a general discharge is a separation from the Army under honorable conditions. _______XXX_______________ 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 | CY2002 | 2002073935C070403
The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein. Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations – Enlisted Personnel), chapter 10 (Discharge for the Good of the Service), then in effect, set forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel. Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations – Enlisted Personnel), paragraph 3-7 provides that an honorable discharge is a separation with honor.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2012 | 20120001786
However, about 10 September 1986, he was told he had 5 days to out-process for an overseas assignment. The DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) he was issued shows he was discharged by reason of for the good of the service - in lieu of court-martial with an under other than honorable conditions characterization of service. There is no evidence and the applicant did not provide any evidence that shows he was advised by the unit XO that his enlistment contract...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100007700
The applicant requests upgrade of his under other than honorable conditions discharge. On 23 December 1987, the applicant consulted with legal counsel and he was advised of the basis for the contemplated trial by court-martial, the maximum permissible punishment authorized under the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ), the possible effects of an under other than honorable conditions discharge, and of the procedures and rights that were available to him. _______ _X _______...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2004 | 2004100519C070208
The Board considered the following evidence: Exhibit A - Application for correction of military records. Accordingly, the applicant was discharged under other than honorable conditions on 29 June 1987 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.