| Mr. Carl W. S. Chun | Director | |
| Mr. Joseph A. Adriance | Analyst |
| Ms. Shirley L. Powell | Chairperson | |
| Mr. Stanley Kelley | Member | |
| Mr. Elzey J. Arledge, Jr. | Member |
APPLICANT REQUESTS: In effect, that his under other than honorable conditions (UOTHC) discharge be changed to a medical discharge.
APPLICANT STATES: In effect, that he was diagnosed with an obsessive compulsive disorder and social anxiety, which should have resulted in his being processed for separation through medical channels.
EVIDENCE OF RECORD: The applicant's military records show:
On 3 November 2000, he enlisted in the Regular Army for 3 years. He was trained and served in military occupational specialty 92A (Automated Logistical Specialist). The highest rank and pay grade he attained while serving on active duty was private first class/E-3 (PFC/E-3) and his record documents no acts of valor, significant achievement, or service warranting special recognition.
The specific facts and circumstances pertaining to the events surrounding the applicant’s discharge processing are not on file. However, there is a properly constituted separation document (DD Form 214) in the record that was authenticated by the applicant with his signature on the date of his separation and which identifies the authority, character, and reason for his discharge.
The DD Form 214 confirms that the applicant was discharged on 14 August 2001, under the provisions of chapter 10, Army Regulation 635-200, in lieu of trial by court-martial, after completing just 9 months and 12 days of active military service.
The applicant’s record contains a copy of a Report of Medical Examination
(SF 88), dated 17 July 2001, that was completed on him during his separation processing. This document confirms that, although there was an abnormal psychiatric finding related to anxiety, after completing a psychological evaluation medical officials determined that the applicant was medically qualified for retention/separation.
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. Although an honorable or general discharge is authorized, a discharge under other than honorable conditions is normally considered appropriate.
Army Regulation 635-40 prescribes the policy and procedure for the Army Disability System. Paragraph 4-3 states, in pertinent part, that a member may not be referred for or continue disability processing when action has been started under any regulatory provision that authorizes a character of service of under other than 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:
1. The Board notes the applicant’s contention that he should have been processed for separation by a medical board based on his being diagnosed with a compulsive disorder and social anxiety; however, it finds insufficient evidence to support this claim.
2. By regulation, a member may not be referred for or continue physical disability processing when action has been started under any regulatory provision that authorizes a character of service of under other than honorable conditions. The applicant’s record is void of facts and circumstances concerning the events that led to a discharge from the Army. However, the Board notes that his record contains a properly constituted DD Form 214 which was authenticated by the applicant with his signature on the date of his separation. This document identifies the reason and characterization of the discharge and the Board presumes Government regularity in the discharge process.
3. The evidence of record shows the applicant was discharged under the provisions of Chapter 10, AR 635-200, in lieu of trial by court-martial. In connection with such a discharge, he was charged with the commission of an offense punishable under the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) with an punitive discharge. Procedurally, he 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, he would have had to admit guilt to the stipulated offense under the UCMJ and in the absence of information to the contrary, the Board is satisfied that all requirements of law and regulation were met and the rights of the applicant were fully protected throughout the separation process.
4. Further, the applicant’s medical record gives no indication of a medical condition incurred on active duty that was so severe as to render him medically unfit for retention on active duty prior to his being processed for separation in lieu of trial by court-martial. Additionally, his separation physical examination confirms that he was medically cleared for separation by competent medical authority. Therefore, the Board finds no evidentiary basis to support a conclusion that he should have been processed for separation through medical channels.
5. 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.
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
__SLP__ __SK __ __EJA___ DENY APPLICATION
| CASE ID | AR2001063029 |
| SUFFIX | |
| RECON | |
| DATE BOARDED | 2002/03/19 |
| TYPE OF DISCHARGE | UOTHC |
| DATE OF DISCHARGE | 2001/08/14 |
| DISCHARGE AUTHORITY | AR 635-200 C10 |
| DISCHARGE REASON | In Lieu of Court-Martial |
| BOARD DECISION | DENY |
| REVIEW AUTHORITY | |
| ISSUES 1. 177 | 108.0000 |
| 2. | |
| 3. | |
| 4. | |
| 5. | |
| 6. |
ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080002752
In his discharge request, the applicant indicated that he understood that by submitted the request for discharge, he was acknowledging his guilt of the charge against him or of a lesser included offense therein contained, which also authorized the imposition of a bad conduct or dishonorable discharge. An UOTHC discharge normally is appropriate for a Soldier who is discharged in lieu of trial by court-martial. However, the evidence of record shows that the applicant's medical condition was...
ARMY | DRB | CY2005 | 20050008506
David R. Gallagher | |Member | The Board considered the following evidence: Exhibit A - Application for correction of military records. On 10 January 1983, the Army Discharge Review Board (ADRB) voted to deny the applicant’s request for an upgrade of his discharge after concluding that his discharge was proper and equitable. The SF 88 on file confirms the purpose of the applicant’s 19 August 1981 physical examination was for “Discharge”, which was based on his being processed for...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2007 | 20070007788C080407
Counsel requests that the applicant's UD be upgraded to an honorable discharge (HD); and that the applicant be awarded the Overseas Service Ribbon (OSR) and National Defense Service Medal (NDSM). On 20 November 1973, the Army Discharge Review Board (ADRB), after carefully considering the applicant's military records and all other available evidence, determined the applicant was properly discharged and as a result denied the applicant's request for an upgrade of his discharge. Counsel's...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100028362
On 2 January 1970, the separation authority approved the applicant's request for discharge and directed the issuance of an undesirable discharge. Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 3-7b, provides that a general discharge is a separation from the Army under honorable conditions. His record of service during his last enlistment included one NJP and serious offenses (attempted murder) for which court-martial charges were preferred against him.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080017335
The applicant requests, in effect, an upgrade of his under other than honorable conditions (UOTHC) discharge. On 14 December 2007, the Army Discharge Review Board (ADRB), after carefully considering the applicant's military records and all other available evidence, determined the applicant was properly discharged and as a result denied the applicant's request for an upgrade of his discharge. The regulation stipulates that the separation authority may authorize a general, under honorable...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2007 | 20070016966C080407
THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE: 1. The applicant’s record shows he enlisted into the Regular Army and entered active duty on 29 December 1972. However, the regulation does allow the issuance of a general discharge (GD), under honorable conditions discharge; or an honorable discharge (HD), if the separation authority determines it is warranted based on the member's overall record of service.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090012078
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 of a lesser included offense that also authorized the imposition of a bad conduct discharge or a discharge under other honorable conditions. The DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) he was issued shows he was discharged for the good of the service in lieu of a court-martial with a characterization of...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2007 | 20070018325
On 13 January 1987, the separation authority approved the applicant's request for discharge for the good of the service in accordance with chapter 10 of Army regulation 635-200 and directed she receive an Under Other Than Honorable Conditions Discharge Certificate and be reduced to private/E-1. The DD Form 214 she was issued at the time of her discharge shows that she was discharged for the good of the service with an Under Other Than Honorable Conditions character of service. Furthermore,...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2007 | 20070001452C071029
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 20 March 2007 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20070001452 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. Further, he was subsequently found medical qualified for retention/separation and cleared for separation by competent medical authority during his separation processing. Absent any evidence that the applicant suffered...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2004 | 20040011635C070208
The applicant requests, in effect, that his undesirable discharge (UD) be upgraded to an honorable discharge, and/or that he receive a medical discharge. The applicant’s request for an upgrade of his discharge to either an honorable discharge or medical discharge was carefully considered. As a result, there is insufficient evidence showing the applicant suffered from a medical condition that warranted his processing for separation through medical channels at the time.