| Mr. Carl W. S. Chun | Director | |
| Mrs. Carolyn G. Wade | Analyst |
| Mr. Fred N. Eichorn | Chairperson | |
| Mr. Roger W. Able | Member | |
| Ms. Paula Mokulis | Member |
APPLICANT REQUESTS: That his under other than honorable conditions (UOTHC) discharge be upgraded to honorable.
APPLICANT STATES: That he believes he was not given a fair chance to defend himself or the type of discharge he received. The applicant submitted a two-page letter in his own behalf explaining why he felt he had to leave the military.
EVIDENCE OF RECORD: The applicant's military records show:
He enlisted in the Regular Army on 21 September 1978 for a period of 4 years. He enlisted for training in military occupational specialty (MOS) 11C, Indirect Fire Infantryman, and assignment to Europe. Following completion of all military training, the applicant was awarded MOS 11C and was assigned to Germany as his first permanent assignment.
On 1 February 1981, the applicant was transferred to Fort Benning, Georgia. On 14 April 1982, he reenlisted in the Army for a period of 3 years. At the time of reenlistment, the applicant had attained the rank of specialist/E-4 and was credited with 3 years, 6 months, and 22 days of active military service.
On 18 March 1983, the applicant was once again assigned to Germany. On 7 May 1983, 10 days after he reported to Germany, the Red Cross notified his unit that a request for emergency leave had been issued for the applicant because his stepson was seriously ill. The applicant was granted 25 days’ emergency leave with instructions for requesting an extension. The applicant failed to return to his unit in Germany and, on 2 June 1983, he was listed as absent without leave (AWOL).
On 19 March 1984, the applicant was apprehended by civil authorities in Columbus, Georgia, and released to military control at Fort Benning pending transportation to the United States Army Personnel Control Facility (PCF), Fort Bragg, North Carolina. On 27 March 1984, the applicant was charged with being AWOL from 23 June 1983 to 19 March 1984.
On 28 March 1984, the commander of the PCF interviewed the applicant. The applicant stated that he was aware of the nature of the interview and the consequences of a discharge Under Other Than Honorable Conditions and that he desired elimination from the service under the provisions of chapter 10, Army Regulation (AR) 635-200. The applicant stated he had departed AWOL from his unit due to personal problems (i.e., his son was ill with a brain disease and his wife was hospitalized for exhaustion following his son’s surgery); that he could not get a compassionate reassignment; and that he did not return to Germany in order to take care of his children.
On 28 March 1984, after consulting with counsel about his rights, the applicant, voluntarily, and in writing, requested discharge under the provisions of chapter 10, AR 635-200, for the good of the service in lieu of trial by court-martial. The chain of command recommended approval of the applicant’s request for discharge with a UOTHC discharge.
On 29 March 1984, the applicant was placed on excess leave and remained on excess leave until 2 November 1984.
On 15 October 1984, the appropriate authority approved the applicant’s request for discharge and directed issuance of a UOTHC discharge. Accordingly, on 2 November 1984, the applicant was discharged from the Army after completing 5 years, 3 months, and 23 days of creditable military service and accruing 293 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 UOTHC discharge is normally considered appropriate.
There is no evidence the applicant applied to the Army Discharge Review Board (ADRB) for an upgrade of his discharge within its 15-year statute of limitations.
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 noted the applicant’s contentions and empathizes with his family/personal problems. However, after careful consideration of all faithful and honorable service as well as the infraction of discipline, the extent thereof, and the seriousness of the offense, the Board determined that the applicant’s family/personal problems were not sufficiently mitigating to warrant an upgrade of his discharge. Further, the Board could find no evidence that the applicant sought to obtain a compassionate reassignment to care for his family.
3. The Board noted that after consulting with defense counsel, the applicant voluntarily, and in writing, requested separation from the Army in lieu of trial by court-martial. In doing so, the applicant admitted guilt to the stipulated offenses under the UCMJ. The Board was 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 concluded that 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.
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 evidence to demonstrate the existence of probable error or injustice.
BOARD VOTE:
________ ________ ________ GRANT
________ ________ ________ GRANT FORMAL HEARING
__fne____ ____pm__ __rwa __ DENY APPLICATION
| CASE ID | AR2001065178 |
| SUFFIX | |
| RECON | |
| DATE BOARDED | 20020516 |
| TYPE OF DISCHARGE | UOTHC |
| DATE OF DISCHARGE | 19841102 |
| DISCHARGE AUTHORITY | AR 635-200, c10 |
| DISCHARGE REASON | In lieu of trial by court-martial |
| BOARD DECISION | DENY |
| REVIEW AUTHORITY | Director |
| ISSUES 1. | 144.9405 |
| 2. | |
| 3. | |
| 4. | |
| 5. | |
| 6. |
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 | CY2001 | 2001051441C070420
At this late date the Board will not second-guess the commander’s decision not to grant the applicant 45 days leave or to change the start date of his leave. While the Board takes cognizance of the applicant’s stated personal problems, this factor does not warrant the relief requested and it would not be appropriate to change the records to show that the applicant was discharged honorably from the reenlistment commencing on 14 January 1982. That all of the Department of the Army records...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2012 | 20120010106
During this interview, the applicant stated his AWOL was due to family issues. Although an honorable or general discharge is authorized, a discharge under other than honorable conditions is normally considered appropriate. ____________X____________ CHAIRPERSON I certify that herein is recorded the true and complete record of the proceedings of the Army Board for Correction of Military Records in this case.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090004104
The applicant requests reconsideration of his earlier request for an upgrade of his under other than honorable conditions (UOTHC) discharge to an honorable discharge (HD). When authorized, it is issued to a Soldier whose military record is satisfactory but not sufficiently meritorious to warrant an honorable discharge. The applicant contends that he discussed his family problems with his First Sergeant, Company Commander, and Platoon Leader and was granted compassionate leave during this...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2004 | 20040010638C070208
The applicant requests, in effect, that his discharge under other than honorable conditions be upgraded to an honorable discharge. The applicant's military service records show that he enlisted on 2 November 1976 for a period of 4 years. The applicant applied to the Army Discharge Review Board (ADRB) to upgrade his discharge.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2013 | 20130016201
The applicant requests his under other than honorable conditions discharge be upgraded to a general discharge. There is no evidence the applicant applied to the Army Discharge Review Board for an upgrade of his discharge within its 15-year statute of limitations. Records show he was 21 years of age at the time of his last offense.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2015 | 20150001435
Application for correction of military records (with supporting documents provided, if any). In his request for discharge, he indicated he understood that if his request for discharge was accepted, he could be discharged under other than honorable conditions and be furnished an Under Other Than Honorable Conditions Discharge Certificate. The applicant's record contains no documentation that shows he submitted a request for a hardship discharge or compassionate reassignment.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2001 | 2001060583C070421
On 7 October 1983, the applicant was advised that he was being recommended for separation from the Army under the provisions of paragraph 14-12c, chapter 14, Army Regulation 635-200, for commission of a serious offense. Accordingly, on 16 December 1983, the applicant was discharged from the Army after completing 1 year, 2 months, and 27 days of active military service and accruing 655 days of lost time. The character of the discharge is commensurate with the applicant's overall record of...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2004 | 2004102910C070208
The evidence of record shows that on 30 July 1980, the applicant consulted with counsel and submitted a request for discharge from the service under chapter 10, AR 635-200, for the good of the service. There is no evidence that the applicant applied to the Army Discharge Review Board during its 15-year statute of limitations for an upgrade of her discharge. A discharge under other than honorable conditions is normally considered appropriate, but the separation authority may direct a...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2006 | 20060004063C070205
THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE: 1. There is no evidence in the available records to show that he ever applied to the Army Discharge Review Board for an upgrade of his discharge within that board’s 15-year statute of limitations. A condition of submitting such a request is that the individual concerned must admit guilt to the charges against them or of a lesser included offense which authorizes the imposition of a bad conduct or dishonorable discharge and they must...