| Mr. Carl W. S. Chun | Director | |
| Mrs. Nancy Amos | Analyst |
| Mr. John N. Slone | Chairperson | |
| Mr. Lester Echols | Member | |
| Mr. Ronald E. Blakely | Member |
APPLICANT REQUESTS: In effect, that his discharge under other than honorable conditions (UOTHC) be upgraded.
APPLICANT STATES: That he enlisted under the guarantee program but the Army did not honor that guarantee. He provides no supporting evidence.
EVIDENCE OF RECORD: The applicant's military records show:
He enlisted in the Regular Army on 30 October 1972 for training in Army Career Group 62 (Heavy Equipment Operations and Maintenance) and for airborne training. He completed basic training. On 29 March 1973, he waived his enlistment commitment for airborne training by personal choice.
On 2 April 1973, the applicant accepted nonjudicial punishment under Article 15, Uniform Code of Military Justice for being absent without leave (AWOL) from 2 to on or about 9 April 1973.
On 9 May 1973, the applicant completed advanced individual training and was awarded military occupational specialty (MOS) 62K (Grader Operator).
The applicant departed AWOL 7 June – 16 July 1973, 23 – 25 July 1973, 13 August – 11 September 1973, and 15 October 1973 – 12 March 1974. The court-martial charge sheet is not available.
On 14 March 1974, the applicant completed a separation physical examination and was found qualified for separation.
On 21 March 1974, 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 UOTHC and that he might be deprived of many or all Army and Veterans Administration benefits. He did not submit a statement in his own behalf. The approval action is not available.
On 16 April 1974, the applicant was discharged with a discharge UOTHC, in pay grade E-1, under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 10, discharge in lieu of trial by court-martial. He had completed 9 months and 28 days of creditable active service and had 229 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 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 UOTHC 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 evidence of record shows that the Army honored all of the applicant’s enlistment commitments. He was trained in Army Career Group 62 and was awarded MOS 62K. He voluntarily waived his airborne training commitment.
3. 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. Considering the length of his AWOLs, the type of discharge given was and still is appropriate.
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
___jns__ ___le___ __reb___ DENY APPLICATION
| CASE ID | AR2001059976 |
| SUFFIX | |
| RECON | |
| DATE BOARDED | 20010925 |
| TYPE OF DISCHARGE | UOTHC |
| DATE OF DISCHARGE | 19740416 |
| 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 | CY2007 | 20070002719
The applicant states that when his discharge was upgraded by the Army Discharge Review Board in 1981, it was supposed to be an honorable discharge. In his request for discharge, the applicant indicated that he understood that by requesting discharge, he was admitting guilt to the charges against him, or to a lesser included offense, and that the imposition of a bad conduct discharge or a dishonorable discharge may be authorized. On 13 February 1981, the Army Discharge Review Board...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2001 | 2001061591C070421
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. DISCUSSION : Considering all the evidence, allegations, and information presented by the applicant, together with the evidence of record, applicable law and...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2001 | 2001065803C070421
APPLICANT STATES : In effect, that he asked for a general discharge for the good of the service, because he was having family problems. On 13 May 1974, court-martial charges were preferred against the applicant of being AWOL from 12 February to 8 May 1974. On 28 May 1974, 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.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2003 | 2003086680C070212
The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein. On 29 March 1974, the appropriate authority approved the applicant’s request for discharge with a UD. The applicant has failed to submit evidence that would satisfy this requirement.
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 | CY2006 | 20060008890C070205
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: January 9, 2007 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20060008890 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. In the absence of the applicant's chapter 10 discharge proceedings, 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...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2004 | 20040009801C070208
On 8 March 1984, the applicant accepted nonjudicial punishment (NJP) under the provisions of Article 15 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ), for violating a lawful general regulation by borrowing money from trainees on two separate occasions. On 14 March 1986, the applicant was discharged accordingly. The evidence of record confirms the applicant’s honorable service between 1971 and 1973 is properly documented and recognized in the DD Form 214 he received for this period of...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100029547
The applicant requests that his under other than honorable conditions (UOTHC) discharge be upgraded to honorable and that his pay grade of E-6 be restored. On 25 August 1977, the separation authority approved the applicants request for discharge and directed that he be issued an Under Other Than Honorable Conditions Discharge Certificate. Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations): a.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2012 | 20120004841
The applicant requests an upgrade of his undesirable discharge to honorable. On 24 April 1974 after consulting with counsel, the applicant submitted a request for discharge for the good of the service in lieu of trial by court-martial under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations Enlisted Personnel), chapter 10. Since his brief record of service included one imposition of nonjudicial punishment, one special court-martial conviction, and 446 days of lost time, his...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2005 | 20050003731C070206
On 21 March 1974, the separation authority approved the applicant's request for discharge and directed that he be furnished an undesirable discharge. Evidence of record shows that on 28 February 1974, after consulting with counsel, the applicant submitted a request for discharge for the good of the service and indicated in his request that he had not been subjected to coercion. The applicant’s record of service included one nonjudicial punishment and 59 days of lost time.