| Mr. Carl W. S. Chun | Director | |
| Mrs. Carolyn G. Wade | Analyst |
| Ms. Karol A. Kennedy | Chairperson | |
| Mr. Mark D. Manning | Member | |
| Mr. Thomas Lanyi | Member |
APPLICANT REQUESTS: That his discharge under other than honorable conditions (UOTHC) be upgraded.
APPLICANT STATES: That as a previous member of the military, he finds his life extremely torn due to his prior discharge. He states that his discharge was never overturned and that he is hoping the court [Board] will appoint counsel to represent him. He also states that his basic concerns are his right to counsel, due process, and the forms he signed under pressure without knowledge or reasonable understanding.
EVIDENCE OF RECORD: The applicant's military records show:
He enlisted in the Regular Army (RA) on 16 July 1975 for a period of 3 years and training in military occupational specialty (MOS) 76Y, Supply Specialist. Following completion of all military training, the applicant was awarded MOS 76Y and was assigned to Fort Campbell, Kentucky, as his first permanent duty assignment.
On 10 November 1975, the applicant accepted nonjudicial punishment (NJP) under the provisions of Article 15, Uniform Code of Military Justice for being absent without leave (AWOL) from 8 thru 10 November 1975. His punishment consisted of forfeiture of $50.00 pay per month for 1 month.
On 16 December 1975, the applicant accepted NJP for failing to go to his appointed place of duty. His punishment consisted of forfeiture of $20.00 pay per month for 1 month and 7 days’ restriction and extra duty.
On 10 February 1976, the applicant accepted NJP for possession of marijuana. His punishment consisted of 30 days’ confinement in the correctional custody facility and forfeiture of $201.00 pay per month for 1 month.
On 23 March 1976, the applicant accepted NJP for being disrespectful toward a noncommissioned officer (NCO). His punishment consisted of forfeiture of $50.00 pay per month for 1 month, reduction to private/E-1 (suspended 60 days), and 14 days’ restriction and extra duty.
On 8 July 1976, the applicant was barred from reenlistment due to his numerous NJP’s and counseling statements.
On 27 October 1976, the applicant accepted NJP for dereliction of duty (sleeping on guard duty). His punishment consisted of forfeiture of $50.00 pay per month for 1 month and 14 days’ restriction and extra duty.
On 12 January 1977, the applicant accepted NJP for being AWOL from 3 thru 5 January 1977. His punishment consisted of forfeiture of $75.00 per month for 1 month (suspended 90 days) and 14 days’ restriction and extra duty.
On 18 April 1977, court-martial charges were preferred against the applicant. He was charged: under the provisions of Article 91, UCMJ, with twice striking an NCO, twice disobeying a lawful order of an NCO, and disrespect towards an NCO; and under the provisions of Article 134, UCMJ, with twice communicating a threat to an NCO.
On 29 April 1977, after consulting with counsel about his rights, the applicant requested discharge under the provisions of chapter 10, Army Regulation (AR) 635-200, for the good of the service in lieu of trial by court-martial. The applicant elected not to make a statement in his own behalf. The chain of command recommended approval of the applicant’s request for discharge with a UOTHC.
On 17 May 1977, the appropriate authority approved the applicant’s request for discharge and directed issuance of a UOTHC. Accordingly, on 20 May 1977, the applicant was discharged from the Army after completing 1 year, 10 months, and 3 days of creditable military service and accruing 2 days of lost time.
AR 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 under other than honorable conditions is normally considered appropriate.
The applicant petitioned the Army Discharge Review Board (ADRB) seeking a discharge upgrade. After considering his case, on 27 August 1980, the ADRB denied his request.
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 administrative discharge under the provisions of chapter 10, AR 635-200 in lieu of trial by court-martial was accomplished in compliance with applicable regulations with no indication of procedural errors that would tend to jeopardize his rights.
3. The Board noted the applicant’s contention regarding his concern for his right to counsel, due process, and the forms he signed (under alleged pressure) without knowledge or reasonable understanding. The evidence of record indicates that after consulting with defense counsel and being advised of his rights and the consequences of requesting discharge under the provisions of chapter 10, the applicant voluntarily, and in writing, requested separation from the Army in lieu of trial by court-martial. He was provided an opportunity to make a statement in his own behalf, but declined to do so. The Board found no evidence of coercion and 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. The Board noted that the applicant’s chain of command tried to assist him in performing and conducting himself to Army standards by providing counseling and by the imposition of nonjudicial punishment; however, the applicant failed to respond appropriately.
5. It is not within the purview of this Board to provide the applicant counsel to assist him; however, he may contact any of the veterans’ service organizations for assistance. A list of veterans’ service organizations that appear before this Board is attached for his consideration.
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
___KAK__ ___MDM ___TL ___ DENY APPLICATION
| CASE ID | AR2001064142 |
| SUFFIX | |
| RECON | |
| DATE BOARDED | 20020423 |
| TYPE OF DISCHARGE | UOTHC |
| DATE OF DISCHARGE | 19770520 |
| DISCHARGE AUTHORITY | AR 635-200, chapter 10 |
| DISCHARGE REASON | For the good of the service |
| BOARD DECISION | DENY |
| REVIEW AUTHORITY | Director |
| ISSUES 1. | 144.9405 |
| 2. | |
| 3. | |
| 4. | |
| 5. | |
| 6. |
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002068651C070402
He was involuntarily ordered to active duty from the Army National Guard of the United States on 14 August 1975 for a period of 19 months and 12 days. On 7 October 1981, the Army Discharge Review Board (ADRB) denied the applicant's request for an upgrade of his discharge. Army policy states that although an honorable or general discharge is authorized, a UOTHC discharge is normally considered appropriate.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2007 | 20070002873C071029
The resulting approved sentence was a BCD. Given his undistinguished record of service and the severity of the offenses for which he was convicted, there is an insufficient evidentiary basis to support clemency in this case. As a result, the Board further determined that there is no evidence provided which shows that it would be in the interest of justice to excuse the applicant's failure to timely file this application within the 3-year statute of limitations prescribed by law.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2003 | 2003088833C070403
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. Exhibit A - Application for correction of military records. The applicant was convicted by a general court-martial of the above charges and was sentenced to a BCD, confinement at hard labor for 1 year, reduction in rank to private/E-1, and forfeiture of all pay and allowances.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080014490
This provision of law also allows the Army Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR) to excuse an applicants failure to timely file within the 3-year statute of limitations if the ABCMR determines it would be in the interest of justice to do so. On 20 June 1977, the separation authority approved the applicants request for discharge and directed that he be issued a Discharge Certificate Under Other Than Honorable Conditions. On 2 March 1983, the Army Discharge Review Board denied...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002075015C070403
APPLICANT STATES : In effect, that he served 3 years, 11 months, and 19 days beyond his ETS date and that, upon being released from the United States Disciplinary Barracks (USDB), he should have been honorably discharged. On 30 May 1979, the unit commander recommended approval of the request for discharge under the provisions of chapter 10, Army Regulation 635-200 and the issuance of a discharge under other than honorable conditions. Accordingly, on 15 June 1979, the applicant was...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090011292
The applicant requests upgrade of his under other than honorable conditions (UOTHC) discharge to an honorable discharge (HD), or at least a general, under honorable conditions discharge (GD). After consulting with counsel and being advised of his rights and options, the applicant voluntarily submitted a formal request for discharge under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations - Enlisted Personnel), chapter 10, for the good of the service in lieu of trial by...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2007 | 20070011006
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 25 January 2008 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20070011006 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. On 11 March 1976, the applicant accepted nonjudicial punishment (NJP) under the provisions of Article 15, Uniform Code of Military Justice, for failure to report for duty and for dereliction of duty. On 12 October...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002068504C070402
The Board considered the following evidence: On 12 October 1978, 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 discharge UOTHC. Carl W. S. Chun Director, Army Board for Correction of Military RecordsINDEXCASE IDAR2002068504SUFFIXRECONYYYYMMDDDATE BOARDED2002/06/11TYPE OF DISCHARGE(UOTHC)DATE OF DISCHARGE1978/10/12DISCHARGE AUTHORITYAR635-200,chapter 10 .
ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080005784
IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 17 July 2008 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20080005784 THE BOARD CONSIDERED THE FOLLOWING EVIDENCE: 1. However, the DD Form 214 he was issued at the time of his discharge shows he was discharged on 7 April 1976, in accordance with chapter 13-5a of Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations), by reason of misconduct-frequent involvement of a discreditable nature, with a character of service of under other than honorable conditions. Further, the applicant's discharge...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002071194C070402
Special Order Number 127 ordered applicant’s discharge, effective the following day, citing the authority of GCM Order Number 68, which was the 11 November 1974 order issued by Fort Campbell, Kentucky promulgating the results of applicant’s general court-martial. Failure to file within 3 years may be excused by a correction board if it finds it would be in the interest of justice to do so. Had the Board determined that an error or injustice existed it would have recommended relief in spite...