| Mr. Carl W. S. Chun | Director | |
| Mr. William Blakely | Analyst |
| Mr. Raymond V. O'Connor, Jr. | Chairperson | ||
| Mr. John P. Infante | Member | ||
| Ms. Regan K. Smith | Member |
APPLICANT REQUESTS: In effect, that his discharge under other than honorable conditions (UOTHC) be upgraded.
APPLICANT STATES: In effect, that alcohol impaired his ability to serve in the Army. He states that his addiction to alcohol was the cause of his misconduct that resulted in him being punished under the Uniform Code of Military Justice. He further states that he has been free of alcohol for 10 years and is now a successful business owner and husband. In support of his application, he submits the following documents: Certificate Of Release Or Discharge From Active Duty (DD Form 214); Personnel Qualification Record (DA Form 2-1); Record of Court-Martial (DA Form 2-2); and associated medical documents.
EVIDENCE OF RECORD: The applicant's military records show:
The applicant entered the Army on 24 August 1979 and completed training in military occupational specialty 11B1P (Infantry/Parachutist) at Fort Benning, Georgia. He was subsequently assigned to Fort Bragg, North Carolina, for his first permanent duty station.
The applicant’s record shows that the highest rank he attained while serving on active duty was private/E-2 and it documents no significant acts of valor, significant achievement, or service warranting special recognition. However it does contain an extensive disciplinary history that includes his acceptance of nonjudicial punishment (NJP) and a conviction by a special court-martial.
On 7 August 1980, the applicant was convicted of the following offenses by a special court-martial: failure to go to his appointed place of duty; missing movement; and AWOL on the following three separate occasions: 21 to 22 May 1980; 25 May to 8 June 1980; and 1 to 5 July 1980. His sentence included a reduction to private/E-1, a forfeiture of $274.00 pay for 3 months, and 21 days of extra duty. On 3 October 1980, the applicant accepted NJP for being AWOL from 10 to 20 September 1980.
The applicant’s discharge packet is missing from his military records; however, a properly constituted separation document (DD Form 214) is on file that documents the reason and characterization of his discharge. This document confirms that on 17 December 1980, he was administratively separated under the provisions of chapter 14, Army Regulation 635-200, by reason of frequent incidents of a discreditable nature with civil or military authorities and that he received an UOTHC discharge. It also shows that at the time of his discharge he had completed only 1 year, 2 months and 18 days of creditable active military service and that he had accrued 37 days of lost time due to AWOL.
There is no evidence that the applicant applied to the Army Discharge Review Board for an upgrade of his discharge within its 15-year statue of limitations.
Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for separation of enlisted personnel. Paragraph 14-33b, then in effect, provided for separating members for a pattern of misconduct, including frequent incidents of discreditable nature with civil or military authorities. An under other than honorable discharge certificate was 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. The Board notes the applicant’s contentions that alcohol impaired his ability to serve in the Army and that his post service conduct has been excellent. However, it finds insufficient evidence to show these factors are sufficiently mitigating to warrant the requested relief.
2. The Board finds no evidence of record that shows that the applicant’s disciplinary history was alcohol related and he has failed to provide independent evidence to the contrary. In addition, while the Board congratulates the applicant on his post service accomplishments, this factor alone does not provide a basis for upgrading his discharge.
3. The evidence of record confirms that the applicant’s administrative separation was accomplished in compliance with applicable regulations in effect at the time. In the absence of information to the contrary, the Board is satisfied that all requirements of law and regulation were met and that the rights of the applicant were fully protected throughout the separation process. The applicant’s discharge appropriately characterizes his overall record of service and the Board finds, in view of the facts of this case, that relief is not warranted.
4. 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.
5. 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__ _ _JPI__ __RKS DENY APPLICATION
| CASE ID | AR2001062416 |
| SUFFIX | |
| RECON | YYYYMMDD |
| DATE BOARDED | 2002/03/07 |
| TYPE OF DISCHARGE | (UOTHC) |
| DATE OF DISCHARGE | 19801217 |
| DISCHARGE AUTHORITY | AR635-200, paragraph 14-33b. . . . . |
| DISCHARGE REASON | Frequent Incidents of a discreditable nature |
| BOARD DECISION | (DENY) |
| REVIEW AUTHORITY | |
| ISSUES 1 92.21. | 110.00 |
| 2.94.43 | |
| 3. | |
| 4. | |
| 5. | |
| 6. |
ARMY | BCMR | CY2007 | 20070017348
The applicant requests, in effect, that his discharge, characterized as under other than honorable conditions (UOTHC), be upgraded to an honorable discharge. The applicant states, in effect, that he received an UOTHC discharge for misconduct. The applicant's contentions and additional statement were considered; however, they do not support or provide a basis to upgrade his UOTHC discharge.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2007 | 20070000705
There is no evidence that the applicant applied to the Army Discharge Review Board (ADRB) for an upgrade of his discharge within its 15-year statute of limitations. Army Regulation 635-5-1, in effect at that time, prescribed the specific authorities (regulatory, statutory, or other directives), the reasons for the separation of members from active military service, and the separation program designators to be used for these stated reasons. The regulation shows that the separation program...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2003 | 2003090022C070212
I certify that hereinafter is recorded the record of consideration of the Army Board for Correction of Military Records in the case of the above-named individual. Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 3-7, provides that a general discharge is a separation from the Army under honorable conditions. 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:
ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090010201
The applicant's records show he enlisted in the Regular Army and entered active duty on 9 January 1980. There are no medical records in the applicants available Official Military Personnel File (OMPF) that indicate he was suffering from a disabling mental or physical condition at the time of his discharge processing. A UOTHC discharge is normally considered appropriate for members separated under these provisions of the regulation.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080003662
The applicant requests, in effect, that his discharge, characterized as under other than honorable conditions (UOTHC), be upgraded to an honorable discharge. However, the applicant's records contain a copy his DD Form 214 which shows that on 20 October 1982, he was discharged, in the pay grade of E-1, under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 14, paragraph 14-33b(1), for misconduct due to his frequent incidents of a discreditable nature with civil and military authorities. ...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2005 | 20050004334C070206
The applicant’s military records are incomplete; however, the available records show that he enlisted in the Regular Army on 24 August 1979. 3. Review of the applicant’s record of service shows that he had various incidents of misconduct, 3 nonjudicial punishments, 1 court-martial and 128 days of lost time due to AWOL and confinement. Records indicate that the applicant was 19 years old at the time his discharge.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2012 | 20120010252
On 5 September 1980, the separation authority approved the board's recommendation for discharge of the applicant and directed the applicant be discharged under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 14, paragraph 14-33b, for misconduct based upon frequent incidents of a discreditable nature with civil or military authority with an under other than honorable conditions discharge. While there is no evidence of record that shows the applicant was involved in any incidents of a...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090010914
Application for correction of military records (with supporting documents provided, if any). On 10 September 1980, the unit commander notified the applicant that he was initiating action to separate him under the provisions of paragraph 14-33b(1), Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations Enlisted Separations), by reason of misconduct frequent incidents of a discreditable nature with civil or military authorities. The JAG office further determined the evidence was legally...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090003054
Included in the medical records are three DA Forms 1051 (Report of Injury) that show: a. he was hospitalized from 29 February to 3 March 1979 for injuries to his face and a mild concussion following an altercation in a civilian bar; b. on 16 July 1980, he received a head injury. The separation authority approved the separation action and directed that the applicant be reduced to the lowest enlisted grade and issued a UOTHC discharge. The applicant was discharged on 15 August 1981 under the...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2004 | 2004099943C070208
The Board considered the following evidence: Exhibit A - Application for correction of military records. Even if he had not been recommended for separation under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 14, there appears to have been no basis for a medical discharge. Evidence of record shows the same SSN was used at the time of the applicant's enlistment and his discharge from the Army.