| Mr. Carl W. S. Chun | Director | |
| Ms. Stephanie Thompkins | Analyst |
| Ms. June Hajjar | Chairperson | |
| Ms. Karol A. Kennedy | Member | |
| Mr. Roger W. Able | Member |
APPLICANT REQUESTS: That his discharge under other than honorable conditions (UOTHC) be upgraded to honorable.
APPLICANT STATES: That he went absent without leave (AWOL) because his mother was ill and he wanted to change his military occupational specialty. He went back and he was promised a general discharge, but did not receive this type of discharge. He also states that he did not realize the discharge could be changed. He submits a copy of his separation document (DD Form 214) in support of his request.
EVIDENCE OF RECORD: The applicant's military records show:
He enlisted in the Regular Army, as a private, pay grade E-1, on 31 July 1975.
He was advanced to pay grade E-2 on 30 November 1975.
He was reported AWOL on 16 March 1976 and dropped from the rolls of the Army on 14 April 1976.
On 28 April 1976, a commander’s inquiry was held concerning the AWOL. His commander stated in the inquiry that he believed the applicant did not return because of personal problems at home and had inquired several times into how he could get a compassionate reassignment because of the poor health of his mother. The commander’s inquiry found no reason to justify his absence other than the applicant’s personal problems at home and the fact he did not like Germany.
On 3 September 1976, he was apprended by civilian authorities and returned to military control.
The facts and circumstances pertaining to the applicant's discharge are not on file. The applicant’s DD Form 214 indicates that he was discharged on 7 October 1976, under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 10, in pay grade E-1, and was issued a UOTHC discharge certificate.
There is no evidence that the applicant applied to the Army Discharge Review Board within its 15-year statute of limitation.
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 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. A discharge UOTHC is normally considered appropriate.
Paragraph 3-7 of this regulation provides that an honorable discharge is a separation with honor. The honorable characterization is appropriate when the quality of the member's service generally has met the standards of acceptable conduct and performance of duty for Army personnel, or is otherwise so meritorious that any other characterization would be inappropriate.
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 view of the circumstances in this case, the applicant is not entitled to an upgrade of his discharge to honorable. He has not shown error, injustice, or inequity for the relief he now requests.
2. The applicant’s contentions of family problems back home and that he was promised a general discharge have been noted by the Board. However, his commander was aware of his personal problems back home and felt the applicant decided to absent himself for that reason and also because he did not like his assignment in Germany. It appears that the applicant chose to request an administrative discharge rather than risk the consequences of a court-martial and although he may now feel that he made the wrong choice, he should not be allowed to change his mind at this late date.
3. In the absence of evidence to the contrary, it is presumed that the discharge proceedings were conducted in accordance with law and regulations applicable at the time. The character of the discharge is commensurate with his overall record.
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
In view of the foregoing, there is no basis for granting the applicant's request.
BOARD VOTE:
________ ________ ________ GRANT
________ ________ ________ GRANT FORMAL HEARING
_kak____ _rwa____ _jh_____ DENY APPLICATION
| CASE ID | AR2001062753 |
| SUFFIX | |
| RECON | |
| DATE BOARDED | 20020205 |
| TYPE OF DISCHARGE | |
| DATE OF DISCHARGE | |
| DISCHARGE AUTHORITY | |
| DISCHARGE REASON | |
| BOARD DECISION | DENY |
| REVIEW AUTHORITY | |
| ISSUES 1. | A70 |
| 2. | |
| 3. | |
| 4. | |
| 5. | |
| 6. |
ARMY | BCMR | CY2001 | 2001065904C070421
The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein. When given the choice between being discharged or court-martialed, he elected to be discharged believing he would be able to have his discharge upgraded at a later date. He has presented no evidence which would serve as a basis to upgrade the character of his discharge.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140009020
The applicant requests upgrade of his discharge to honorable and correction of his DD Form 214 (Report of Separation from Active Duty). On 22 July 1976, the applicant appeared in person before the ADRB and testified under oath that * he enlisted to better his education and or training to get some kind of training that he couldn't otherwise get or afford * he first started having problems in the service when he couldn't get an allotment for his wife * the entire time he was in Germany it...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2006 | 20060010821C071029
In the request the applicant submitted to the Board originally, he stated he was supposed to be discharged for medical reasons because of a back injury from a motorcycle accident, and that he was, at the time, trying to qualify for Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) benefits. A copy of a DA Form 31, Request and Authority for Leave, in the applicant's service record shows he was allowed to go on excess leave pending approval of his request for discharge in lieu of trial by court- martial. ...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | 20110008667
The applicant requests that his under other than honorable conditions discharge (UOTHC) be changed to a medical discharge. On 28 July 1977, after consulting with counsel, he voluntarily requested discharge for the good of the service under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations), chapter 10. He was released on 28 February 1977 and returned to duty.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002071854C070403
The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein. EVIDENCE OF RECORD : The applicant's military records show: He stated that he was proud of his Vietnam service but was ashamed of the conduct which led to his court-martial and to his present situation.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2005 | 20050006163C070206
On 12 August 1976, the applicant's commander requested orders be published ordering the applicant to active duty for 15 months and 2 days for unexcused absences from unit training assemblies. The applicant's commander also stated that, when the applicant appeared at the Reserve Center after the battalion had departed for field training (during the 17 and 18 July 1976 meeting), he was told by the battalion commander to go to a classroom and wait and that he (the applicant) would then be...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090003742
Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 3-7b, provides that a general discharge is a separation from the Army under honorable conditions. The applicant has provided no evidence other than his self-authored statement that the circumstances regarding his personal problems were the reasons he committed the offenses which led to his discharge. Therefore, he has failed to show through the evidence submitted with his application or the evidence of record that the actions taken in his case were in...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002075966C070403
The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein. The applicant was granted leave in the States from 9 November through 8 December 1974. On 19 October 1975, the applicant surrendered to military authorities.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2001 | 2001063468C070421
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 to authorize a formal hearing, recommend that the records be corrected without a formal hearing, or to deny the application without a formal hearing if it is determined that insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate the existence of probable material error or injustice. The applicant requests...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002068441C070402
On 6 March 1975, court-martial charges were preferred against the applicant of being AWOL from 8 October 1974 to 28 February 1975. On 28 April 1975, 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 UD. On 22 June 1981, the Army Discharge Review Board denied the applicant's request for an upgrade of his discharge.