| Mr. Carl W. S. Chun | Director | |
| Mr. William Blakely | Analyst |
| Mr. Raymond V. O’Connor, Jr. | Chairperson | |
| Mr. Christopher J. Prosser | Member | |
| Ms. Linda D. Simmons | Member |
APPLICANT REQUESTS: In effect, that his under other than honorable conditions (UOTHC) discharge be upgraded to honorable discharge.
APPLICANT STATES: In effect, that he has been incarcerated and feels that the passage of time warrants an upgrade of his discharge. In support of his application he submits a certificate of training from the state of Alabama and a copy of his Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty (DD Form 214).
EVIDENCE OF RECORD: The applicant's military records show:
On 1 April 1982, the applicant enlisted in the Army for 3 years. The highest rank he attained while serving on active duty was specialist (E-4). He successfully completed basic combat training, advanced individual training, and he was subsequently assigned to Fort Benning, Georgia.
While assigned to Fort Benning, Georgia, the applicant was absent without leave (AWOL) from 25 May 1985 to 10 June 1985. Item 27 (Remarks) of the applicant’s Personnel Qualification Record (DA Form 2-1) indicates he went AWOL again on 16 August 1985 and was apprehended on 25 October 1985, by civilian authorities in Alamogordo, New Mexico. He remained in custody of the civilian authorities and was convicted on 17 December 1985 of first degree robbery, auto larceny with a deadly weapon, and assault with the intent to commit murder. He was sentenced to 15 years civilian confinement.
The applicant’s discharge packet containing the specific facts and circumstances surrounding his discharge is not in the record. However, there is a properly constituted separation document (DD Form 214) on file that contains the authority and reason for discharge. This document was authenticated by the applicant with his signature. It confirms that on 17 March 1986, he was discharged under the provisions of chapter 14, Army Regulation 635-200, for conviction by civil authorities. It also shows that his service was characterized as UOTHC and that he had completed only 3 years and 7 months of active military service.
There is no evidence that the applicant applied to the Army Discharge Review Board for upgrade of his discharge within its 15-year statue of limitations.
Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel. Chapter 14 establishes policy and prescribes procedures for separating members for misconduct. Specific categories include minor disciplinary infractions, a pattern of misconduct, commission of a serious offense, convictions by civil authorities, desertion or absence without leave. Action will be taken to separate a member for misconduct when it is clearly established that rehabilitation is impracticable or is unlikely to succeed. Army policy states that a discharge UOTHC is normally considered appropriate, but a general discharge under honorable conditions or an honorable discharge may be granted.
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. Lacking evidence to the contrary, administrative regularity is presumed in the applicant’s administrative separation under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 14, for conviction by civil authorities.
2. The Board notes the applicant’s contention that his extensive period of incarceration and the passage of time warrants an upgrade of his discharge is without merit. The Board finds the type of discharge directed and the reasons therefor were and are 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
___RVO__ __CJP__ __LDS __ DENY APPLICATION
| CASE ID | AR2001058065 |
| SUFFIX | |
| RECON | YYYYMMDD |
| DATE BOARDED | 2001/08/30 |
| TYPE OF DISCHARGE | (UOTHC) |
| DATE OF DISCHARGE | 19860317 |
| DISCHARGE AUTHORITY | AR635-200, chapter 14 . . . |
| DISCHARGE REASON | conviction by civil authorities |
| BOARD DECISION | (DENY) |
| REVIEW AUTHORITY | |
| ISSUES 1 67.30. | |
| 2. | |
| 3. | |
| 4. | |
| 5. | |
| 6. |
ARMY | BCMR | CY2004 | 20040010104C070208
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 8 September 2005 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20040010104 I certify that hereinafter is recorded the true and complete record of the proceedings of the Army Board for Correction of Military Records in the case of the above-named individual. When a Soldier is convicted by civil authorities, the regulation mandates consideration for discharge. His conviction by civil authorities obligated military authorities to consider the applicant for discharge.
ARMY | DRB | CY2013 | AR20130011000
On 30 August 2010, the unit commander notified the applicant of initiation of separation action under Army Regulation 635-200, Chapter 14-5, section II, for misconduct, civil conviction. On 10 November 2010, the separation authority approved the waiver request and directed the applicants discharge with a characterization of service of under other than honorable conditions. EVIDENCE SUBMITTED BY THE APPLICANT: The applicant provides in support of his application a DD Form 293 (Application...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2001 | 2001063023C070421
The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein. The Board considered the following evidence: He had 1 year, 3 months and 16 days of active military service.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2005 | 20050009914C070206
On 10 October 1984, the applicant was transferred to the 25th Infantry Division, Schofield Barracks, Hawaii, reporting for duty with the Combat Support Company, 1st Battalion, 5th Infantry Regiment on 5 December 1984, as a Scout Driver. There is no evidence in the available records to show that the applicant applied to the Army Discharge Review Board within the board’s 15 year statute of limitations. Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2007 | 20070014376
The applicant requests, in effect, an upgrade of his under other than honorable conditions discharge to a general discharge under honorable conditions. The board of officers met to determine whether the applicant should be discharged from the service by reason of Chapter 14-12c commission of a serious offense, under the provision of Army Regulation 635-200. The separation document (DD Form 214) issued to the applicant upon his separation shows that on 18 August 1992, the applicant was...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2012 | 20120010716
The applicant requests an upgrade of his undesirable discharge to an honorable discharge. He was convicted by civil authorities on 22 April 1975 and sentenced to incarceration in the State Penitentiary for 3 years. On 14 July 1975 the applicant's commander notified him that he was initiating action to discharge him from the service under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-206 (Personnel Separations Discharge Misconduct) due to his conviction by civil authorities.
ARMY | DRB | CY2012 | AR20120004403
Applicant Name: ????? On 10 August 2010, the separation authority approved the recommendation of the administrative separation board and directed the applicants discharge with a characterization of service of under other than honorable conditions. Board Discussion, Determination, and Recommendation After carefully examining the applicants record of service during the period of enlistment under review and considering the analysts recommendation and rationale, the Board determined that...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2006 | 20060017552
However, the applicant's records contain a copy his DD Form 214 which shows that on 24 September 1984, he was discharged under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 14, section II, for a civil conviction, in the pay grade of E-1. However, there is no evidence in the available records, and the applicant has provided no evidence, to show that his discharge should be upgraded or was unjust. K. Patterson_____ CHAIRPERSON INDEX CASE ID AR20060017552 SUFFIX RECON YYYYMMDD DATE...
ARMY | DRB | CY2013 | AR20130000226
The board recommended the applicants discharge with characterization of service of under other than honorable conditions. On 2 May 2007, the separation authority approved the recommendation of the administrative separation board and directed the applicants discharge with a characterization of service of under other than honorable conditions. However, after examining the applicants record of service, his military records, the documents and the issues submitted with the application, there...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2006 | 20060002147C070205
THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE: 1. The applicant was discharged on 29 January 1986 under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 10 for the good of the service with an UOTHC discharge. On 8 January 1987, the Army Discharge Review Board (ADRB), by unanimous vote, denied the applicant’s request for an upgrade of his discharge to general under honorable conditions.