| Mr. Carl W. S. Chun | Director | |
| Ms. Wanda L. Waller | Analyst |
| Mr. George D. Paxson | Chairperson | |
| Mr. Walter T. Morrison | Member | |
| Mr. Richard T. Dunbar | Member |
APPLICANT REQUESTS: That his discharge under other than honorable conditions be upgraded to honorable.
APPLICANT STATES: That he served his country with courage, faithfully and with honor. He contends, in effect, that after leaving Vietnam and having experienced what he did in Vietnam, he could not handle the negative reaction from the American people. In support of his application, he submits a copy of his DD form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty); a letter, dated 26 March 1998; a letter, dated 26 March 1998, from his ex-wife; and a letter of support, dated 23 November 1997.
EVIDENCE OF RECORD: The applicant's military records were requested from the National Personnel Records Center in St. Louis, Missouri. However, very limited service personnel records were provided to the Board for consideration. Records show the applicant enlisted on 6 September 1966 for a period of 3 years. An affidavit executed by the applicant indicates that he served in Vietnam from October 1967 to October 1968.
Records show nonjudicial punishment was imposed against the applicant on two occasions (no other details available).
The applicant went absent without leave (AWOL) on 9 November 1968 and returned to military control on 18 November 1997. Charges were preferred against the applicant for the AWOL period on 20 November 1997 and trial by special court-martial was recommended.
On 20 November 1997, after consulting with counsel, the applicant submitted a request for discharge in lieu of trial by courts-martial under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 10. He indicated in his request that he understood he could be discharged under other than honorable conditions, that he may be deprived of many or all Army benefits, that he may be ineligible for many or all benefits administered by the Veterans Administration, and that he may be deprived of his rights and benefits as a veteran under both Federal and State law. He also acknowledged that he may expect to encounter substantial prejudice in civilian life because of an Under Other Than Honorable Conditions Discharge. Additionally, he elected not to submit a statement in his own behalf.
On 24 November 1997, the applicant’s unit commander recommended approval of the applicant’s request for discharge and issuance of a general discharge.
On 24 November 1997, the Chief, Criminal Law Division, at U.S. Army Field Artillery Center and Fort Sill, did not concur with the unit commander’s recommendation for separation with a general discharge. He cited that the applicant was charged with an AWOL offense for 29 years and that he received two Article 15’s during his enlistment; therefore, a general discharge was not merited by the applicant’s overall record. He recommended that the applicant be separated with a discharge under other than honorable conditions.
On 24 November 1997, the separation authority approved the applicant’s request for discharge and directed that he be furnished a discharge under other than honorable conditions.
Accordingly, the applicant was discharged under other than honorable conditions on 26 November 1997 under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 10. He had served 2 years, 2 months and 3 days of total active service with 10,601 days lost due to AWOL.
On 7 November 2001, the Army Discharge Review Board denied the applicant’s request to upgrade his discharge.
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 635-200, paragraph 3-7, provides that an honorable discharge is a separation with honor and entitles the recipient to benefits provided by law. The honorable characterization is appropriate when the quality of the member’s service generally has met the standards of acceptable conduct and performance of duty for Army personnel (emphasis added), or is otherwise so meritorious that any other characterization would be clearly inappropriate. Whenever there is doubt, it is to be resolved in favor of the individual.
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 reviewed the applicant’s record of service which included two nonjudicial punishments and 10,601 days of lost time and determined that his quality of service did not meet the standards of acceptable conduct and performance of duty for Army personnel. Therefore, the applicant is not entitled to an honorable discharge.
2. The applicant’s voluntary request for separation under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 10, in lieu of trial by court-martial, was administratively correct and in conformance with applicable regulations.
3. The type of discharge directed and the reasons for separation were appropriate considering all the facts of the case.
4. 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.
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
GDP____ WTM__ RTD_____ DENY APPLICATION
| CASE ID | AR2001065448 |
| SUFFIX | |
| RECON | |
| DATE BOARDED | 20020124 |
| TYPE OF DISCHARGE | (UOTHC) |
| DATE OF DISCHARGE | 19971126 |
| DISCHARGE AUTHORITY | AR 635-200, Chapter 10 |
| DISCHARGE REASON | For the good of the service |
| BOARD DECISION | (DENY) |
| REVIEW AUTHORITY | |
| ISSUES 1. | 110.0200 |
| 2. | |
| 3. | |
| 4. | |
| 5. | |
| 6. |
ARMY | BCMR | CY2001 | 2001062411C070421
The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein. At a 16 September 1971 mental status evaluation, the applicant's behavior was normal. There is no evidence of record, or evidence submitted by the applicant, that he was physically or mentally mistreated during his military service.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2015 | 20150001436
THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE: 1. There is no evidence in his military records and the applicant has not provided sufficient evidence to support his contention that he completed paperwork opting out of the Army in lieu of serving in Korea. Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 3-7b, provides that a general discharge is a separation from the Army under honorable conditions.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | 20110003403
On 21 March 1978, the separation authority approved the applicant's voluntary request for discharge and directed that he be furnished an under other than honorable conditions discharge. Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 3-7b, provides that a general discharge is a separation from the Army under honorable conditions. _______ _ 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 | CY2006 | 20060007407C070205
The applicant requests that the undesirable discharge of her deceased husband, a former service member (FSM), be upgraded to honorable. She also states that the FSM’s brother was just a cook and got his discharge changed and he did not see what the FSM saw in Vietnam. Chapter 10 of the 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 charges have been...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2013 | 20130001423
The SPD code of "KFS" is the correct code for Soldiers separating under the provisions of chapter 10 of Army Regulation 635-200. The evidence of record further confirms his RE code was assigned based on his separation under the provisions of chapter 10 of Army Regulation 635-200 for the good of the service in lieu of trial by court-martial. The applicant's DD Form 214 shows the appropriate RE code and he did not submit any evidence that the RE code is in error or unjust.
ARMY | DRB | CY2006 | AR20060011701
The request may be submitted at any time after charges have been preferred and must include the individuals admission of guilt. The applicant was charged with AWOL and while still in an entry-level status voluntarily requested discharge under the provisions of Chapter 10, AR 635-200, in lieu of trial by court-martial. Certification Signature and Date Approval Authority: MARK E. COLLINS Colonel, U.S. Army President, Army Discharge Review Board Official: CHRISTINE U. MARTINSON DATE: 20...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | 20110014904
Application for correction of military records (with supporting documents provided, if any). He acknowledged he understood if the discharge request was approved, he may be discharged under other than honorable conditions and be furnished an Undesirable Discharge Certificate. The DD Form 214 he was issued confirms he was discharged under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 10, for the good of the service in lieu of trial by court-martial with his service characterized as...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140004156
THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE: 1. The applicant requests that his discharge under other than honorable conditions be upgraded to a more favorable discharge. On 20 January 1998, the appropriate authority approved his request for discharge and directed he be given an under other than honorable conditions discharge.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090009895
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. Table 2-1 (Composition of the OMPF) of this Army regulation states that the DD Forms 553 and 616 are filed on the performance section of the OMPF and that the DA Form 4187 that shows time lost to be made good to...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2013 | 20130012887
On 3 September 1997, he consulted with legal counsel and voluntarily requested discharge for the good of the service in lieu of trial by court-martial under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations Enlisted Personnel), chapter 10, due to charges preferred against him under the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) which authorized the imposition of a bad conduct or dishonorable discharge. There is no evidence indicating he applied to the Army Discharge Review...