| Mr. Carl W. S. Chun | Director | |
| Mr. Robert J. McGowan | Analyst |
| Mr. Fred N. Eichorn | Chairperson | |
| Mr. Ted S. Kanamine | Member | |
| Mr. John T. Meixell | Member |
APPLICANT REQUESTS: That his under other than honorable conditions (UOTHC) discharge be upgraded to an honorable or general discharge.
APPLICANT STATES: In effect, that he is divorced with custody of his infant son. His son has multiple, major medical problems caused by his premature birth. Applicant requires an under honorable conditions discharge in order to become a law enforcement officer in Texas. He needs this job in order to care for his son. In support of his request, he submits documentation to show that his son is in poor health and that he requires at least a general discharge in order to become a law enforcement officer in Texas.
EVIDENCE OF RECORD: The applicant's military records show:
He enlisted in the Regular Army on 28 January 1997. At the time of his enlistment, he was 20 years old and married. His son was born prematurely on 4 December 1997 and has cerebral palsy and multiple medical ailments.
The applicant was absent without leave (AWOL) when his son was born. He was AWOL during the periods 6 April-2 May 1997, 3-20 May 1997, and 16 June 1997 to 6 January 1998. Upon his return to military control, court-martial charges were preferred against him and, after consulting with legal counsel, he requested separation for the good of the service in lieu of trial by court-martial under the provisions of chapter 10, AR 635-200.
The applicant was separated with a UOTHC discharge on 10 April 1998. His DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge From Active Duty) reflects that he had 6 months and 3 days of creditable active Federal service and 250 days of lost time.
The applicant petitioned the Army Discharge Review Board (ADRB) seeking a discharge upgrade. He was given a personal appearance before a travel panel of the board on 29 February 2000 and the board heard his case on 9 March 2000. The ADRB denied his request for a discharge upgrade.
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 Board sympathizes with the applicant's situation regarding his son and understands that he cannot become a law enforcement officer with a UOTHC discharge; however, the Board does not grant relief solely for the purpose of gaining employment or enhancing employment opportunities.
3. The applicant’s discharge proceedings were conducted in accordance with applicable law and regulations. 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
__fne____ __tsk____ __jtm___ DENY APPLICATION
| CASE ID | AR2001063985 |
| SUFFIX | |
| RECON | |
| DATE BOARDED | 20020110 |
| TYPE OF DISCHARGE | UOTHC |
| DATE OF DISCHARGE | 19980510 |
| 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 | 2001054138C070420
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 Board notes that the applicant signed documents stating that he understood that he was being separated as an alcohol abuse rehabilitation failure.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2004 | 20040007798C070208
The applicant’s ARNG records are not available to the Board. That would have placed the applicant 46 pounds over the maximum weight allowed at that time, which indicated a lengthy period of time over which he had a weight problem. Army Regulation 600-9 (The Army Weight Control Program) applies to all members of the Active Army, the ARNG, and the U.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2001 | 2001059253C070421
When the applicant has established that she has been harmed, the Board first looks at whether it can rectify the injustice by correcting the records related to the outcome of the titling, instead of reversing the titling decision. 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: DETERMINATION : The applicant has failed to submit sufficient relevant...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2004 | 040004479C070208
Larry Olson | |Member | The Board considered the following evidence: Exhibit A - Application for correction of military records. If the applicant were in fact disqualified from award of the Army Good Conduct Medal the entire disqualification action, including the unit commander’s decision document, the period of disqualification, and evidence that the action had been referred to the individual for comment, should have been filed in the OMPF, not just the memorandum of record. In fact,...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2004 | 20040004184C070208
On 20 November 1998, the separation authority directed the applicant’s separation under the provisions of paragraph 14-12b, Army Regulation 635- 200, by reason of a pattern of misconduct and that he receive a GD. The evidence of record confirms the applicant’s separation processing was accomplished in accordance with the applicable regulation. The governing regulation states that while an HD or GD are authorized, an UOTHC discharge is normally considered appropriate for members...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002074133C070403
The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein. APPLICANT STATES : In effect, that he was told that he was being separated from the service under Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 13, with an honorable discharge. However, the available evidence of record clearly states that he was notified by his commander that he was being recommended for separation under chapter 14 for misconduct.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2001 | 2001062806C070421
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. The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein. The applicant appealed to the Army Discharge Review Board (ADRB) for an upgrade of his discharge to a general discharge on 4 October 2001.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002070575C070402
The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein. Permanent Orders 314-01, Headquarters, 3d Armored Cavalry Regiment dated 10 November 1998 awarded the applicant the AAM. On 9 November 2000, the applicant accepted nonjudicial punishment under Article 15, Uniform Code of Military Justice for assault (striking his wife), communicating a threat (to his wife), and failure to obey an order (violating the commander’s order not...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2003 | 2003088724C070403
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: The applicant submits no documents in support of his application, but he does claim that cannot get a job and he requests that his overall record of service be considered.
ARMY | DRB | CY2013 | AR20130007015
It states a separation will be described as entry-level with service uncharacterized if, at the time separation action is initiated, the Soldier has less than 180 days of continuous active duty service. The separation authority approved the applicant's discharge as entry-level status, with the description of service as uncharacterized. The Regulation also provides, except in cases of serious misconduct, that a Soldiers service will be uncharacterized when the separation is initiated while...