| Mr. Carl W. S. Chun | Director | |
| Mrs. Nancy Amos | Analyst |
| Ms. Irene N. Wheelwright | Chairperson | |
| Mr. Raymond J. Wagner | Member | |
| Ms. Gail J. Wire | Member |
APPLICANT REQUESTS: In effect, that his discharge under other than honorable conditions (UOTHC) be upgraded.
APPLICANT STATES: That he was unable to continue because of a foot condition. He provides no supporting evidence.
EVIDENCE OF RECORD: The applicant's military records show:
He enlisted in the Regular Army on 9 September 1980. He completed basic training and advanced individual training and was awarded military occupational specialty 94B (Food Service Specialist).
The applicant’s medical records show he was treated on 5 October 1980 for dryness of the feet. On 29 October 1980, he was treated for a sore throat. On 5 December 1980, he was treated for a complaint of chest pain.
On 7 April 1981, court-martial charges were preferred against the applicant charging him with being absent without leave (AWOL) from 24 February to on or about 5 April 1981.
On 8 April 1981, the applicant completed a mental status evaluation. He was found to be mentally responsible, to be able to distinguish right from wrong and to adhere to the right, and to have the mental capacity to understand and participate in board proceedings. A separation physical is not available.
On 14 April 1981, 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 elected not to submit a statement in his own behalf.
On 24 April 1981, the appropriate authority approved the request and directed the applicant receive a discharge UOTHC.
On 22 May 1981, 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 7 months and 5 days of creditable active service and had 40 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 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.
3. There is no evidence of record to show the applicant had a foot condition or that a foot condition was the cause of his AWOL. He submitted no statement in his own behalf to explain the reason for his AWOL when he had the opportunity to do so. Considering the circumstances, the type of discharge given was 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
__inw___ __rjw___ __gjw___ DENY APPLICATION
| CASE ID | AR2001063982 |
| SUFFIX | |
| RECON | |
| DATE BOARDED | 20020312 |
| TYPE OF DISCHARGE | UOTHC |
| DATE OF DISCHARGE | 19810522 |
| 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 | CY2004 | 20040009825C070208
The applicant's DD Form 214 shows he was separated on 10 February 1984 under the provisions of chapter 10, Army Regulation 635-200 with a UOTHC discharge for the good of the service-in lieu of court-martial. He had completed 1 year, 11 months and 7 days of active military service and he had approximately 588 days of lost time, due to being AWOL and in military confinement. There is no evidence that the applicant ever applied to the Army Discharge Review Board for review of his discharge...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | 20110002613
Application for correction of military records (with supporting documents provided, if any). The applicant acknowledged he: a. was making the request of his own free will and he had not been subjected to any coercion whatsoever by any person; b. had been advised of the implications that were attached to his request and that by submitting his request he also acknowledged he was guilty of the charges against him or of a lesser included offense that also provided for the imposition of a bad...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002074227C070403
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: The documents provided by the applicant show that the applicant was admitted to a hospital in Petersburg, West Virginia, on 8 February 1981 and was treated for acute appendicitis (Appendectomy).
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002070888C070402
The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein. On 29 April 1981, the applicant’s unit commander recommended approval of the applicant’s request for separation with a UOTHC discharge. Carl W. S. Chun Director, Army Board for Correction of Military RecordsINDEXCASE IDAR2002070888SUFFIXRECONDATE BOARDED20020926TYPE OF DISCHARGE(UOTHC)DATE OF DISCHARGE19810515DISCHARGE AUTHORITYAR635-200, Ch 10DISCHARGE REASONA01.33BOARD...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2003 | 2003091649C070212
The Board considered the following evidence: Exhibit A - Application for correction of military records. The U.S. Court of Appeals, observing that applicants to the Army Discharge Review Board (ADRB) are by statute allowed 15 years to apply there, and that this Board's exhaustion requirement (Army Regulation 15-185, paragraph 2-8), effectively shortens that filing period, has determined that the 3 year limit on filing to the Army Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR) should...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2001 | 2001056343C070420
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: Carl W. S. Chun Director, Army Board for Correction of Military RecordsINDEXCASE IDAR2001056343SUFFIXRECONDATE BOARDED20010830TYPE OF DISCHARGE(UOTHC)DATE OF DISCHARGE19820311DISCHARGE AUTHORITYAR635-200, CHAPTER 10 DISCHARGE REASONA70.00BOARD DECISION(DENY)REVIEW AUTHORITYISSUES 1.144.70002.3.4.5.6.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002078087C070215
APPLICANT REQUESTS: That his under other than honorable conditions (UOTHC) discharge be upgraded to an honorable discharge. APPLICANT STATES : That prior to the period of enlistment under review, he was honorably separated for medical reasons while he was still in basic training. Although, an honorable or general discharge was authorized, a UOTHC discharge was then considered appropriate.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2001 | 2001061208C070421
The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein. The applicant requested discharge for the good of the service in lieu of trial by court-martial under the provisions of chapter 10, AR 635-200. The evidence of record shows the applicant was discharged under the provisions of chapter 10, AR 635-200, for the good of the service in lieu of trial by court-martial.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | 20110020132
The applicant requests reconsideration of his previous request to upgrade his under other than honorable conditions discharge (UOTHC) to an honorable discharge. On 13 August 1981, the separation authority approved his request for discharge under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 10, for the good of the service - in lieu of trial by court-martial, with the issuance of a UOTHC discharge. When authorized, it is issued to a Soldier whose military record is satisfactory but not...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2012 | 20120020677
Application for correction of military records (with supporting documents provided, if any). However, the record does contain a properly-constituted DD Form 214 that shows he was discharged under the provisions of chapter 10, Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations-Enlisted Personnel), in lieu of trial by court-martial. Although an honorable discharge (HD) or general discharge (GD) is authorized, a UOTHC discharge is normally considered appropriate.