| Mr. Carl W. S. Chun | Director | |
| Mrs. Nancy Amos | Analyst |
| Mr. John H. Kern | Chairperson | |
| Mr. Thomas Lanyi | Member | |
| Ms. Paula Mokulis | Member |
APPLICANT REQUESTS: That his discharge under other than honorable conditions (UOTHC) be upgraded.
APPLICANT STATES: That while in basic training he made a serious and foolish mistake and went absent without leave (AWOL). After three months he turned himself in. He was asked if he wanted to stay in the Army or be discharged. He was immature at the time and decided he wanted to be discharged. He provides his Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty, DD Form 214, as supporting evidence.
EVIDENCE OF RECORD: The applicant's military records show:
He was born on 11 February 1963. He enlisted in the U. S. Army Reserve (USAR) on 24 March 1982. He was ordered to initial active duty for training and completed basic training and advanced individual training and was awarded military occupational specialty 51R (Interior Electrician). He was discharged on 23 August 1982 for the purpose of enlisting in the USAR Delayed Entry Program. He enlisted in the Regular Army on 9 November 1982.
On 1 March 1983, court-martial charges were preferred against the applicant charging him with being AWOL from 24 November 1982 to on or about 1 March 1983.
On or about 4 March 1983, after consulting with legal counsel, the applicant voluntarily requested a discharge under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 10 for the good of the service in lieu of trial by court-martial. The applicant was advised of the effects of a discharge under other than honorable conditions and that he might be deprived of many or all Army and Veterans Administration benefits. He submitted no statement in his own behalf.
On 24 March 1983, the appropriate authority approved the applicant’s request and directed he receive a discharge UOTHC.
On 15 April 1983, 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 discharge UOTHC. He had completed 2 months and 2 days of creditable active service for that period and had 97 days of 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 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. 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.
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 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. He was advised at the time of the effects of a discharge under other than honorable conditions.
3. The Board notes the applicant’s age at the time he departed AWOL. However, he had completed basic training and advanced individual training and so was aware of the standards of conduct required by the Army. The Board is also cognizant that thousands of soldiers his age or younger successfully complete their terms of service. Considering the circumstances of his case, it would not be equitable to grant him the benefits of an upgraded discharge.
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
__jhk___ __tl____ __pm____ DENY APPLICATION
| CASE ID | AR2001056966 |
| SUFFIX | |
| RECON | |
| DATE BOARDED | 20010823 |
| TYPE OF DISCHARGE | UOTHC |
| DATE OF DISCHARGE | 19830415 |
| DISCHARGE AUTHORITY | AR 635-200, ch 10 |
| DISCHARGE REASON | A70.00 |
| BOARD DECISION | (DENY) |
| REVIEW AUTHORITY | |
| ISSUES 1. | 110.00 |
| 2. | |
| 3. | |
| 4. | |
| 5. | |
| 6. |
ARMY | BCMR | CY2001 | 2001064698C070421
The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein. On 25 November 1987, the Army Discharge Review Board denied his request for upgrade of his discharge. The applicant’s contention that his command violated his medical profile and denied his request to change his MOS is not supported by the available evidence of record.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2007 | 20070010340C080213
THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE: 1. The applicant states that, after basic training, he returned home for his fathers funeral. Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 3-7b, provides that a general discharge is a separation from the Army under honorable conditions.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2001 | 2001060360C070421
On 5 December 1981, the applicant submitted a DA Form 4187 (Personnel Action) for a hardship discharge. On 11 February 1983, the applicant’s unit commander recommended that his request for discharge be approved with a UOTHC discharge. There is nothing in the applicant's record, and he has provided nothing, that indicates his recruiter promised him he would be allowed to continue his boxing career in the military.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2005 | 20050001263C070206
The applicant provides: a. The Board determined that the evidence presented was sufficient to warrant a recommendation for partial relief and to excuse failure to timely file. Ronald E. Blakely ______________________ CHAIRPERSON INDEX CASE ID AR20050001263 SUFFIX RECON DATE BOARDED 20050927 TYPE OF DISCHARGE UOTHC DATE OF DISCHARGE 19840502 DISCHARGE AUTHORITY AR 635-200 C10 DISCHARGE REASON BOARD DECISION GRANT REVIEW AUTHORITY ISSUES 1.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2005 | 20050001263C070206
THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE: 1. The applicant provides: a. The Board determined that the evidence presented was sufficient to warrant a recommendation for partial relief and to excuse failure to timely file.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2003 | 2003083573C070212
The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein. He states, “but still could not control it.” In addition, he states, that he was absent without leave (AWOL) for a couple of days and subsequently put out of the military. 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...
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 | CY2008 | 20080019285
THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE: 1. At the time of his discharge, he was told he could get his discharge upgraded after a time. There is no evidence of record which indicates the actions taken in his case were in error or unjust; therefore, there is no basis for granting the applicant's request for an upgrade of his discharge.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2003 | 2003083705C070212
In accordance with Army Regulation 15-185, the application and the available military records pertinent to the corrective action requested were reviewed to determine whether to authorize a formal hearing, recommend that the records be corrected without a formal hearing, or to deny the application without a formal hearing if it is determined that insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate the existence of probable material error or injustice. The applicant's DD Form 214...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140009899
The applicant requests reconsideration of his earlier request for an upgrade of his under other than honorable conditions (UOTHC) discharge to an under honorable conditions (general) discharge. Following consultation with legal counsel, he voluntarily 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. However, at the time of his discharge, there is no...