| Mr. Carl W. S. Chun | Director | |
| Ms. P. A. Castle | Analyst |
| Mr. John N. Slone | Chairperson | |
| Mr. Richard T. Dunbar | Member | |
| Mr. Donald P. Hupman, Jr. | Member |
APPLICANT REQUESTS: In effect, that the narrative reason for his separation on his DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release of Discharge from Active Duty) be changed from “For the Good of the Service – In lieu of Court Martial” to “For the Good of the Service”.
APPLICANT STATES: In effect, that at the time of his discharge his actions were due to extraordinary circumstances and his inability to communicate effectively with his superiors. He states that in July 2000 the Army Discharge Review Board (ADRB) changed his discharge from “under other than honorable conditions” to “general, under honorable conditions” and restored his grade to Sergeant/E5. He further claims the narrative reason for discharge is creating a problem with his ability to obtain employment in law enforcement.
EVIDENCE OF RECORD: The applicant's military records show:
On 28 February 1990 the applicant reenlisted for a period of two years. His military record shows two prior active duty periods from 31 August 1984 to
26 March 1987 and from 27 March 1987 to 27 February 1990 in which he received honorable discharge certificates.
Upon completion of a seven month tour of active duty in the Persian Gulf, the applicant was assigned to Fort Bragg, NC in April 1991. On 24 September 1991 he received non-judicial punishment (NJP) under the provisions of Article 15, Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) for being two days absent without leave (AWOL). The applicant stated the reason for the AWOL was to protect his mother in New York from ongoing rioting in her neighborhood.
In November 1991 the applicant was charged with AWOL from 4 October 1991 to 13 November 1991. The applicant’s reason for the AWOL was to obtain the proper health care for his condition from a civilian doctor and to get some rest.
On 19 November 1991 he consulted with legal counsel and having been advised submitted a statement with his signature wherein he voluntarily requested discharge from the Army under the provisions of chapter 10, Army Regulation 635-200 for the good of the service in lieu of trial by court-martial. He also submitted a statement in support of his request where he acknowledged his guilt in the charges preferred against him and further indicated that he understood that he could receive an under other than honorable conditions discharge and that the discharge would have a significant effect on eligibility for veteran’s benefits.
On 25 November 1991 the appropriate authority approved the applicant’s request for discharge and issuance of a discharge under other than honorable conditions. Accordingly, on 16 December 1991 he was discharged after completing 7 years, 2 months, and 7 days of creditable service and 39 days AWOL.
On 9 June 2000 the ADRB upgraded the applicant’s characterization of service from under other than honorable conditions to general, under honorable conditions and restored his pay grade E-5. The ADRB denied his request for a change in the reason for discharge and found that his narrative reason for separation was both proper and equitable.
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 is authorized, a discharge under other than honorable conditions is normally 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. The record is absent of evidence that the applicant did not understand the nature and consequences of his decision to willfully absent himself without leave to stay with his mother and again to seek medical care and rest.
2. The Board is cognizant that the two periods of AWOL spoiled his otherwise clean military record in over seven years of active duty service. However, unless the Board is presented evidence that the applicant was not discharged “for the good of the service in lieu of court-martial” there is no error or injustice.
3. Considering the seriousness of the offense for which the applicant was charged, the reason is still appropriate. While the Board is empathetic, the applicant’s employment difficulties are not sufficiently mitigating to warrant a change to the narrative reason for separation.
4. 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.
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
__rtd____ ___js ___ ___dh___ DENY APPLICATION
| CASE ID | AR2001056105 |
| SUFFIX | |
| RECON | YYYYMMDD |
| DATE BOARDED | 2001/08/28 |
| TYPE OF DISCHARGE | |
| DATE OF DISCHARGE | 1991/12/16 |
| DISCHARGE AUTHORITY | AR . . . . . |
| DISCHARGE REASON | |
| BOARD DECISION | DENY |
| REVIEW AUTHORITY | |
| ISSUES 1. 189 | 110.00 |
| 2. | |
| 3. | |
| 4. | |
| 5. | |
| 6. |
ARMY | BCMR | CY2005 | 20050017990C070206
Ernestine Fields | |Member | The Board considered the following evidence: Exhibit A - Application for correction of military records. The applicant failed to report to the attached unit. A condition of submitting such a request is that the individual concerned must admit guilt to the charges against them or of a lesser included offense which authorizes the imposition of a bad conduct or dishonorable discharge and they must indicate that they have been briefed and understand...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2007 | AR20070004564C071029
THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE: 1. The evidence of record shows that he had almost as much lost time due to AWOL as he had good time. Therefore, the Board determined that the overall merits of this case are insufficient as a basis for correction of the records of the individual concerned ____ Lester Echols_____ CHAIRPERSON INDEX |CASE ID |AR20070004564 | |SUFFIX | | |RECON | | |DATE BOARDED |20070823 | |TYPE OF DISCHARGE | | |DATE OF DISCHARGE | | |DISCHARGE AUTHORITY |...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2006 | 20060009417C070205
THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE: 1. In his request the applicant stated he understood he could request discharge for the good of the service because charges had been filed against him under the UCMJ, which could authorize the imposition of a bad conduct or dishonorable discharge. Pertinent Army regulations provide that prior to discharge or release from active duty, individuals will be assigned reentry codes, based on their service records or the reason for discharge.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2005 | 20050004271C070206
Records show the applicant applied to the Army Discharge Review Board (ADRB) for upgrade of his discharge. Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 3-7, provides that a general discharge is a separation from the Army under honorable conditions. The period of service under consideration includes 94 days of AWOL and separation with an Undesirable Discharge Certificate.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2004 | 20040000802C070208
On 22 May 1985, the applicant was discharged from the active service. On 12 August 1991, the ADRB majority board members granted partial relief to upgrade the applicant's characterization of service to (general) under honorable conditions and unanimously voted no change to the narrative reason for separation. Records show that the applicant was issued a corrected DD Form 214 that showed his discharge Under Conditions Other Than Honorable was changed to Under Honorable Conditions.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100017033
THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE: 1. The applicant further states that the narrative reason for his discharge should be changed because: a. his mother was raped, cut into pieces, and buried beneath a bridge in Oklahoma City; b. he went crazy when he was informed of his mother's demise; c. a corporal in his unit gave him permission to go home and take care of the matter but never informed the chain of command, resulting in his under other than honorable conditions...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2007 | 20070013195
THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE: 1. For that reason, he returned home to marry his girlfriend and raise their son. His only desire was to prevent his unborn son from being aborted and to provide a home for his mother.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2006 | 20060012709
THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE: 1. She had completed 2 years, 7 months, and 6 days of active military service during the period under review. As a result, the time for the applicant to file a request for correction of any error injustice to this Board expired on 9 December 1999.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100012702
THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE: 1. The applicant requests an upgrade of his discharge. Chapter 10 of the version in effect at the time provided that a member who committed an offense or offenses for which the authorized punishment included a punitive discharge could submit a request for discharge for the good of the service at any time after court-martial charges were preferred.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2005 | 20050016052C070206
On 25 July 1978, the separation authority approved the applicant’s request for discharge and directed that he receive an under other than honorable conditions discharge. The discharge proceedings were conducted in accordance with law and regulations applicable at the time and the character of the discharge is commensurate with the applicant's overall record of military service. 9 In order to justify correction of a military record the applicant must show to the satisfaction of the Board,...