| Mr. Carl W. S. Chun | Director | |
| Ms. Carolyn G. Wade | Analyst |
| Mr. Fred N. Eichorn | Chairperson | |
| Mr. John E. Denning | Member | |
| Ms. Terry L. Placek | Member |
APPLICANT REQUESTS: That his discharge under other than honorable conditions (UOTHC) be upgraded.
APPLICANT STATES: In effect, that he was young and immature and thought that he was in love. Because of this, he acted irresponsibly and did not report to his unit of assignment. He states that it has been over 20 years since his discharge; that he regrets his misconduct as a young adult; that he has since matured; and that if he had known the consequences of his actions, he would have found another way to handle his problem.
EVIDENCE OF RECORD: The applicant's military records show:
He was born on 20 October 1962 and enlisted in the Regular Army for 3 years on 27 November 1979. He enlisted for training in military occupational specialty (MOS) 11B, Infantryman, and for the U.S. Army Airborne Enlistment Option. At the time of enlistment, the applicant was 17 years old and had completed the 10th grade. Following completion of all military training, the applicant was awarded MOS 11B and was assigned to Fort Lewis, Washington as his first permanent assignment.
On 27 May 1980, the applicant was promoted to the rank of private/E-2 and, on 27 November 1980, he was promoted to the rank of private first class/E-3.
On or about 19 May 1981, the applicant departed Fort Lewis for an assignment in Panama. He failed to report and, on 23 June 1981, he was listed as absent without leave (AWOL). He remained AWOL until he surrendered to military authorities at Cleveland, Ohio on 10 August 1981. He was transferred to the US Army Personnel Control Facility (PCF) at Fort Knox, Kentucky.
On 13 August 1981, court-martial charges were preferred against the applicant for one specification of AWOL totaling 48 days. On 14 August 1981, after consulting with legal counsel about his rights, the applicant 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 submitted a statement in his own behalf indicating that he joined the Army for a change of pace in his life; that he had completed 10 years of schooling; that he was now 18 years old; and that he now wanted out of the Army because he had personal problems at home.
On 24 August 1981, the company commander and intermediate commander recommended approval of the applicant’s request for discharge under the provisions of chapter 10 with a UOTHC discharge.
On 11 September 1981, the appropriate authority approved the applicant’s request for discharge with a UOTHC discharge. Accordingly, on 5 October 1981, the applicant was discharged from the Army after completing 1 year, 8 months, and 22 days of creditable military service and accruing 48 days of lost time. He was credited with the Expert Infantryman Badge, Army Service Ribbon, Parachute Badge, and the Marksmanship Qualification Badge (M-16 Rifle and Hand Grenade).
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.
On 5 December 1996, the Army Discharge Review Board (ADRB) reviewed the applicant’s request for an upgrade of his discharge. On 18 December 1996, the ADRB 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 administrative separation under the provisions of chapter 10, AR 635-200 in lieu of trial by court-martial was accomplished in compliance with applicable regulations with no indication of procedural errors that would tend to jeopardize his rights.
2. The Board noted the applicant’s contention that he went AWOL because he was young, immature, in love, not thinking clearly, and had personal problems at home. The Board also noted that he was almost 19 years old when he went AWOL and found no evidence that he was any less mature than other 19-year old soldiers who successfully completed military service without resorting to AWOL to handle personal problems. Furthermore, the Board concluded that the applicant had other legitimate avenues through which to obtain assistance or relief without committing the misconduct that led to his discharge from the Army.
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
__FNE__ __JED___ ___TLP__ DENY APPLICATION
| CASE ID | AR2001054289 |
| SUFFIX | |
| RECON | |
| DATE BOARDED | 20010913 |
| TYPE OF DISCHARGE | UOTHC |
| DATE OF DISCHARGE | 19811005 |
| DISCHARGE AUTHORITY | AR 635-200, c10 |
| DISCHARGE REASON | In lieu of trial by court-martial |
| BOARD DECISION | DENY |
| REVIEW AUTHORITY | Director |
| ISSUES 1. | 144.9301 |
| 2. | 144.7301 |
| 3. | |
| 4. | |
| 5. | |
| 6. |
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002079265C070215
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. 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: It also notes that the...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002068103C070402
The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein. APPLICANT STATES: “I…would like to request an upgrade on my discharge from the U.S. Army. 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:
ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080017827
It shows he was discharged under other than honorable conditions under the provisions of chapter 10, Army Regulation 635-200 [Personnel Separations Enlisted Personnel], by reason of ADMINISTRATIVE DISCHARGED (sic) - Conduct triable by court-martial. It also shows he had 85 days of lost time from 8 December 1980 through 2 March 1981; and c. a DD Form 293 (Application for Review of Discharge or Dismissal from the Armed Forces of the United States). Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 3-7b,...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140017264
There is no evidence in the available records that shows he applied to the Army Discharge Review Board for an upgrade of his discharge within its 15-year statute of limitations. The applicant contends he went on leave to resolve family problems. There is no evidence that indicates he was any less mature than other Soldiers of the same age who successfully completed their terms of military service.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2001 | 2001052937C070420
The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein. 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: Carl W. S. Chun Director, Army Board for Correction of Military RecordsINDEXCASE IDAR2001052937SUFFIXRECONDATE BOARDED20010830TYPE OF DISCHARGE(UOTHC)DATE OF DISCHARGEDISCHARGE...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002068441C070402
On 6 March 1975, court-martial charges were preferred against the applicant of being AWOL from 8 October 1974 to 28 February 1975. On 28 April 1975, the applicant was discharged, in pay grade E-1, under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 10, for the good of the service with a UD. On 22 June 1981, the Army Discharge Review Board denied the applicant's request for an upgrade of his discharge.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080001164
The applicant requests, in effect, that his undesirable discharge be upgraded to a general discharge. This lawyer was also informed that the applicant desired to submit a request for discharge for the good of the service under the provisions of Chapter 10 (Discharge in Lieu of Trial by Court-Martial), Army Regulation 635-200 (Enlisted Personnel). In his request for discharge, the applicant also acknowledged that he understood that, if his request for discharge was accepted, he could be...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2006 | 20060011420
THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE: 1. On 30 November 1981, the separation authority approved the applicant's request for discharge and directed that he be furnished a discharge under other than honorable conditions. ___Ted Kanamine_____ CHAIRPERSON INDEX CASE ID AR20060011420 SUFFIX RECON DATE BOARDED 20070227 TYPE OF DISCHARGE UOTHC DATE OF DISCHARGE 19811218 DISCHARGE AUTHORITY AR 635-200 Chapter 10 DISCHARGE REASON For the good of the service, in lieu of...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2007 | 20070000385C071029
A U. S. Army Criminal Investigation Command Report of Investigation revealed that the applicant, Specialist O___, and one other Soldier were involved in the theft of live fragmentation grenades while performing duties at the Fort Lewis, WA grenade range. 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...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2003 | 2003087877C070212
The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein. On 19 February 1981, the approval authority approved the applicant's request for discharge under the provisions of chapter 10, AR 635-200 and directed that he be separated with a UOTHC discharge in pay grade E-1. Although an honorable or general discharge was authorized, a UOTHC discharge was considered appropriate.