| Mr. Carl W. S. Chun | Director | |
| Ms. Rosa M. Chandler | Analyst |
| Ms. Irene N. Wheelwright | Chairperson | |
| Mr. Hubert O. Fry, Jr. | Member | |
| Mr. Donald P. Hupman, Jr. | Member |
APPLICANT REQUESTS: That his under other than honorable conditions (UOTHC) discharge be upgraded to a fully honorable discharge.
APPLICANT STATES: That when he returned to military control after being absent without leave (AWOL), he was given a choice to return to duty or to receive a discharge. At the time of discharge, he was told that his discharge could be upgraded after he had been a member of his community for several years and he has met this requirement. He also states that he was forced into going AWOL. He is reliable and he has excelled in the workplace and in his personal life. He also states that he previously applied for an upgrade of his discharge, but that his records were lost.
EVIDENCE OF RECORD: The applicant's military records show:
He enlisted in the Regular Army for 3 years on 23 April 1981 for training in military occupational specialty (MOS) 11B (Infantryman). He completed basic and advanced individual training and on 27 July 1981 and was assigned to Fort Campbell, Kentucky.
On 8 February 1982, the applicant accepted nonjudicial punishment (NJP) under the provisions of Article 15, Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ), for being AWOL from his unit from 19-20 January 1982. His punishment included forfeiture of pay and 21 days' confinement in the Correctional Custody Facility.
The applicant went AWOL again on 8 February 1982 and remained absent until he returned to military control at the Personnel Control Facility, Fort Campbell on 9 July 1982.
On 14 July 1982, court-martial charges were preferred against the applicant for the above period of AWOL.
On 19 July 1982, the applicant consulted with legal counsel and 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 was advised that he could receive a UOTHC discharge. He authenticated a statement with his own signature in which he acknowledged that he understood the ramifications and effects of receiving a UOTHC discharge. He did not submit a statement in his own behalf.
The applicant’s unit commander recommended separation with a UOTHC discharge. On 26 July 1982, the brigade commander recommended separation with a UOTHC discharge. On 6 August 1982, the separation authority approved the applicant's separation with a UOTHC discharge.
On 27 August 1982, the applicant was separated under the provisions of chapter 10, Army Regulation 635-200, with a UOTHC discharge for conduct triable by court-martial. He had completed 11 months and 4 days of active military service. He also has 152 days of lost time due to being AWOL.
There is no evidence that the applicant ever applied to the Army Discharge Review Board for review of his discharge under that board's 15-year statute of limitations.
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 was never offered a choice between return to duty or discharge. After court-martial charges were preferred against him, he voluntarily requested discharge to avoid trial by court-martial and a possible criminal conviction. There is no evidence of any coercion during the discharge process.
3. The applicant's administrative separation was accomplished in compliance with applicable regulations with no indication of procedural errors which would have jeopardized his rights. The type of discharge directed and the reasons were appropriate considering the facts of the case.
4. The US Army does not have, nor has it ever had, a policy to automatically upgrade discharges. Each case is decided on its own merits when an applicant submits an application requesting a change in discharge. Changes may be warranted if the Board determines that the characterization of service, or the reason for discharge, or both, were improper or inequitable.
5. The Board took into consideration that the applicant has matured and become a productive citizen since being separated from active duty and commends the applicant for his accomplishments. However, post-service accomplishments alone do not provide the Board a basis upon which to grant relief.
6. 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
__INW___ ___HOF_ __DPH__ DENY APPLICATION
| CASE ID | AR2001058081 |
| SUFFIX | |
| RECON | YYYYMMDD |
| DATE BOARDED | 20020115 |
| TYPE OF DISCHARGE | (UOTHC) |
| DATE OF DISCHARGE | 19820827 |
| DISCHARGE AUTHORITY | AR635-200 |
| DISCHARGE REASON | A70.00 |
| BOARD DECISION | (DENY) |
| REVIEW AUTHORITY | |
| ISSUES 1. | 144.7000 |
| 2. | |
| 3. | |
| 4. | |
| 5. | |
| 6. |
ARMY | BCMR | CY2004 | 2004106980C070208
The application submitted in this case is dated 28 August 2003. The applicant's DD Form 214 shows that he was separated on 5 May 1982, under the provisions of chapter 10 of Army Regulation 635-200 for the good of the service in lieu of trial by court-martial and furnished an Under Other Than Honorable Conditions Discharge Certificate. Records show the applicant should have discovered the error or injustice now under consideration on 15 February 1983, the date the ADRB denied his appeal.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2012 | 20120022804
The applicant requests an upgrade of his under other than honorable conditions (UOTHC) discharge to an honorable discharge. He understands clearly how serious it is being AWOL, that's why he told his mother that he would turn himself in to the U.S. Army Criminal Investigation Command (CID). Although an honorable or general discharge was authorized, a discharge UOTHC was normally considered appropriate.
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 | CY2002 | 2002081847C070215
The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein. The applicant was AWOL from his unit from 9-10 December 1974. Carl W. S. Chun Director, Army Board for Correction of Military RecordsINDEXCASE IDAR2002081847SUFFIXRECONDATE BOARDED20030722TYPE OF DISCHARGE(UOTHC)DATE OF DISCHARGE19770328DISCHARGE AUTHORITYAR635-200, Chap 10 DISCHARGE REASONA71.00BOARD DECISION(DENY)REVIEW AUTHORITYISSUES 1.144.71002.3.4.5.6.
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...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2003 | 2003084619C070212
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. On 3 May 1996, the Army Discharge Review Board (ADRB) denied the applicant's request for an upgrade of his discharge. The Board notes the applicant submitted all the paperwork required by the Army to obtain a compassionate reassignment.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100018476
Application for correction of military records (with supporting documents provided, if any). On 19 March 1982, the separation authority approved the applicant's request for discharge and directed he receive a UOTHC discharge. His record documents no acts of valor and did not support the issuance of an honorable discharge or a general discharge by the separation authority at the time of his discharge, nor does it support an upgrade to an honorable discharge or general discharge at this time.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2003 | 2003083452C070212
The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein. On 16 March 1982, the separation authority approved the request and directed that the applicant be reduced to pay grade E-1 and separated with a UOTHC discharge. On 15 March 1991, the Army Discharge Review Board denied the applicant’s request for an upgrade of her discharge.
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 | CY2008 | 20080017045
The applicant requests, in effect, that his under other than honorable conditions discharge be upgraded to honorable. On 20 June 1983, 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. The applicant was discharged on 13 July 1983, in pay grade E-1, under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200,...