| Mr. Carl W. S. Chun | Director | |
| Mr. Robert J. McGowan | Analyst |
| Ms. JoAnn H. Langston | Chairperson | |
| Ms. Margaret K. Patterson | Member | |
| Mr. Eric N. Andersen | Member |
APPLICANT REQUESTS: That his under other than honorable conditions (UOTHC) discharge be upgraded to an honorable discharge (HD).
APPLICANT STATES: In effect, that he was under a lot of pressure because, after being trained in a Signal Corps military occupational specialty (MOS), he spent 3 years doing other work. When he was finally assigned in his MOS, he couldn't do the job. His platoon sergeant and first sergeant constantly picked on him, so he went AWOL (absent without leave) in desperation.
EVIDENCE OF RECORD: The applicant's military records show:
He enlisted in the Regular Army for 3 years on 22 February 1979. Following one station unit training (OSUT), he was awarded MOS 72E (Telecommunication Center Operator) and sent to basic airborne training at Fort Benning, Georgia, followed by his first duty assignment at Fort Bragg, North Carolina. He arrived at Fort Bragg on 8 September 1979 and worked in MOS 75D (Personnel Records Assistant).
The applicant departed Fort Bragg for Fitzsimons Army Medical Center, Denver, Colorado, and training in MOS 35G (Biomedical Equipment Repairman). He was dropped from the course for academic deficiencies and sent back to Fort Bragg in September 1982.
Back at Fort Bragg, the applicant was assigned duties in his original MOS, 72E. On 30 October 1983, he received nonjudicial punishment (NJP) under Article 15, Uniform Code of Military Justice, for AWOL. On 8 December 1983, he received a second NJP for AWOL. On 4 January 1984, he was administered a bar to reenlistment. On 27 February 1984, he went AWOL and remained absent until he surrendered to military authorities at Fort Bragg on 6 June 1984.
Court-martial charges were preferred against the applicant and he requested discharge for the good of the service in lieu of trial by court-martial. Although the applicant’s record is void of facts and circumstances concerning his request for discharge for the good of the service in lieu of trial by court-martial, his record contains a properly constituted DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty). This document identifies the reason and characterization of the discharge. The evidence of record shows the applicant was discharged under the provisions of chapter 10, Army Regulation 635-200, for the good of the service in lieu of trial by court-martial. In connection with such a discharge, the applicant was charged with the commission of an offense punishable under the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) with a punitive discharge. Procedurally, the applicant was required to consult with defense counsel and to voluntarily, and in writing, request separation from the Army in lieu of trial by court-martial. In doing so, the applicant admitted guilt to the stipulated offenses under the UCMJ.
On 10 August 1984, the applicant was separated with a UOTHC discharge under the provisions of chapter 10, AR 635-200. He had 5 years, 2 months, and 3 days of creditable service and 106 days of lost time due to AWOL.
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. Army policy states that although an honorable or general discharge is authorized, a discharge UOHC 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. There is no evidence that his platoon sergeant and first sergeant were harassing the applicant. However, even if true, there were other avenues available to the applicant to resolve his problems; he did not have to resort to going AWOL. There is evidence that the applicant developed a history of going AWOL before the lengthy absence that resulted in court-martial charges being preferred against him.
3. Although the applicant’s discharge proceedings were not a matter of record, the Board presumes Government regularity in that the discharge process was conducted in accordance with law and regulations applicable at the time. The character of the discharge is commensurate with the applicant's overall record of military service.
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
_JHL____ __MKP__ __ENA__ DENY APPLICATION
| CASE ID | AR2001061469 |
| SUFFIX | |
| RECON | |
| DATE BOARDED | 20011204 |
| TYPE OF DISCHARGE | UOTHC |
| DATE OF DISCHARGE | 19840810 |
| DISCHARGE AUTHORITY | AR 635-200 C10 |
| DISCHARGE REASON | A71.00 |
| BOARD DECISION | DENY |
| REVIEW AUTHORITY | DIRECTOR |
| ISSUES 1. | 110.0000 |
| 2. | |
| 3. | |
| 4. | |
| 5. | |
| 6. |
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 | CY2002 | 2002071244C070402
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 the application was filed within the time established by statute, and if not, whether it would be in the interest of justice to waive the failure to timely file. On 11 July 1980 the applicant's duty status was changed from "present for duty" to AWOL (absent without leave). A discharge under other than honorable...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2001 | 2001065178C070421
Accordingly, on 2 November 1984, the applicant was discharged from the Army after completing 5 years, 3 months, and 23 days of creditable military service and accruing 293 days of lost time. 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...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2005 | 20050003178C070206
The applicant requests that his under other than honorable conditions discharge be upgraded to a general discharge. Evidence of record shows that the applicant submitted a DA Form 31 (Request and Authority for Leave), dated 23 May 1984, which shows that he requested to be granted indefinite excess leave while awaiting processing for discharge. The applicant's military service record contains a FDTRF-Form Letter, dated 19 July 1984, from Headquarters, U.S. Army Training Center, Fort...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2001 | 2001060884C070421
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: There is no evidence to support his contentions that he suffered from psychiatric problems, depression, and suicidal ideation; that he was denied medical attention; that he was discriminated against; that his chain of command did not help him; or that his legal counsel advised him to go AWOL.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002067223C070402
On 12 September 2000, the applicant’s DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) shows that he was separated under the provisions of chapter 10, Army Regulation 635-200, in lieu of trial by court-martial with a UOTHC discharge. 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...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002072795C070403
EVIDENCE OF RECORD : The applicant's military records show: 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: However, the Board notes that the record does contain a properly constituted DD Form 214, which identifies the reason and characterization of the applicant’s discharge, and the Board presumes Government regularity in the discharge process.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002068244C070402
The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein. On 30 April 1985, 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. On 11 February 1997, the Army Discharge Review Board denied the applicant’s request for an upgrade of his discharge.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140008502
On 13 June 1984, the separation authority approved the applicant's request for discharge under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 10, and directed the issuance of an under other than honorable conditions discharge and reduction to the lowest enlisted grade. The DD Form 214 the applicant was issued shows she was discharged for the good of the service - in lieu of trial by court-martial with a characterization of service of under other than honorable conditions. The applicant...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2006 | 20060002708C070205
THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE: 1. The applicant's record of service shows he received three Article 15s, one special court-martial, and was AWOL for 52 days during the period under review. Since there is no evidence of record which indicates the actions taken in his case were in error or unjust, there is no basis for granting the applicant's request for an upgrade of his discharge to general under honorable conditions.