| Mr. Carl W. S. Chun | Director | |
| Mr. Lee Cates | Analyst |
| Mr. Raymond V. O'Connor, Jr. | Chairperson | |
| Mr. Donald P. Hupman, Jr. | Member | |
| Mr. Raymond J. Wagner | Member |
APPLICANT REQUESTS: That his records be corrected to show that he was honorably discharged.
APPLICANT STATES: The applicant does not provide a statement
EVIDENCE OF RECORD: The applicant's military records show:
During the period 30 December 1998 through 2 February 1999, he was in the Army Reserve Delayed Enlistment Program.
On 3 February 1999, he enlisted in the Regular Army for 3 years. He did not complete either Basic Combat or Advanced Individual Training.
During the periods 21 June through 15 July, 7 through 13 October, and 24 October through 15 November 1999, he was absent without leave (AWOL).
On 13 October 1999, he received nonjudicial punishment under Article 15, Uniform Code of Military Justice for being AWOL for the period 7 through 13 October 1999. The punishment imposed is not a matter of record.
On 22 December 1999, the unit commander notified the applicant of the initiation of a separation action under Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 14-12c, for serious misconduct and he was advised of his rights. The applicant acknowledged the commander’s notification and requested consulting counsel. He waived personal appearance and consideration by an administrative separation board.
During the period 23 December 1999 through 27 June 2001 (553 days), he was on excess leave.
On 14 June 2001, the appropriate separation authority directed his reduction to pay grade E-1 and that he be issued an under other than honorable conditions (UOTHC) discharge.
On 27 June 2001, he was discharged, in pay grade E-1, with an UOTHC discharge by reason of misconduct. His separation document indicates he had 2 years, 3 months and 2 days of creditable service, 553 days of excess leave and 52 days of lost time.
On 5 December 2001, the Army Discharge Review Board found his discharge to be proper and equitable and denied his request for upgrade.
Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel. Chapter 14 establishes policy and prescribes procedures for separating members for misconduct. Specific categories include minor disciplinary infractions, a pattern of misconduct, commission of a serious offense, convictions by civil authorities, desertion or absence without leave. Action will be taken to separate a member for misconduct when it is clearly established that rehabilitation is impracticable or is unlikely to succeed.
Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations – Enlisted Personnel), paragraph 3-7 provides that an honorable discharge is a separation with honor. 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, or is otherwise so meritorious that any other characterization would be inappropriate.
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 applicant is not entitled to an upgrade of his discharge to honorable.
2. The applicant’s administrative separation was accomplished in compliance with applicable regulations with no indication of procedural errors that would tend to jeopardize his rights.
3. The type of discharge directed and the reasons therefore were appropriate considering all the facts of the case. His discharge was clearly caused by his misconduct.
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
_rvo___ _dph____ _rjw___ DENY APPLICATION
| CASE ID | AR2002066881 |
| SUFFIX | |
| RECON | |
| DATE BOARDED | 20020409 |
| TYPE OF DISCHARGE | |
| DATE OF DISCHARGE | |
| DISCHARGE AUTHORITY | |
| DISCHARGE REASON | |
| BOARD DECISION | DENY |
| REVIEW AUTHORITY | |
| ISSUES 1. | 144 |
| 2. | |
| 3. | |
| 4. | |
| 5. | |
| 6. |
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002066886C070402
He was given a separation code (SPD) of JKK (separation for misconduct, commission of a serious offense) and an RE code of 4. Chapter 13 of Army Regulation 635-200 provides that a member may be separated when it is determined that he or she is unqualified for further military service because of unsatisfactory performance. RE code 3 would also have been required had the applicant been separated solely under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 13.
AF | DRB | CY2007 | AR20070004594
The applicant consulted with legal counsel, was advised of the impact of the discharge action, waived consideration of his case by an administrative separation board and did not submit a statement on his own behalf. The intermediate commander reviewed the proposed discharge action and recommended approval of the separation action with an under other than honorable conditions discharge. Board Action Directed No Change Issue a new DD Form 214 Change Characterization to: Change Reason to: ?????
ARMY | DRB | CY2007 | AR20070004594aC071121
Facts and Circumstances: Evidence of record shows that on 22 December 1999, the unit commander notified the applicant of initiation of separation action under the provisions of Chapter l4, AR 635-200, by reason of misconduct—commission of a serious offense (going AWOL from on or about 21 June 1999 to on or about 16 July 1999, 7 October 1999 to on about 12 October 1999, and 24 October 1999 to on or about 16 November 1999), with an under other than honorable conditions discharge. The...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002073446C070403
The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein. APPLICANT REQUESTS: That he be paid his $6,000.00 enlistment bonus, plus interest. As for the applicant’s clothing, he has not submitted any evidence to show that he abandoned clothing when he deserted.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002081090C070215
The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein. The Board noted the applicant's military awards, but did not find them sufficiently mitigating to warrant an upgrade in his discharge. The Board congratulates the applicant on his conduct since he has been separated, however, this does not provide the Board a basis upon which to grant clemency.
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 | CY2001 | 2001057542C070420
The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein. APPLICANT REQUESTS: That his general discharge be upgraded to an honorable discharge. The Board notes that the applicant was 20 years of age at the time of his first AWOL.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2001 | 2001065298C070421
This action was taken by Fort Bragg, in spite of the fact that the applicant had clearly been present for duty at the PCF, Fort Knox, for eight months and had successfully completed a rehabilitation program. A Personnel Action (DA Form 4187), dated 19 October 1999, prepared by the PCF, Fort Knox, changed the applicant’s duty status from present for duty to AWOL, effective 15 October 1999, and on 29 December 1999, the applicant returned to military control at the PCF, Fort Knox. However, it...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2001 | 2001063236C070421
The response also indicated the Army Board for Correction of Military Records must approve any criteria for promotion to colonel prior to 1997. Based upon review by the Office of Promotions, Reserve Components, Total Army Personnel Command, the applicant’s official military personnel file (OMPF) contained material error when he was considered and non-selected by the 1995 Reserve Components Selection Board. Army Regulation 15-185 establishes procedures for making application, and the...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2003 | 2003089944C070403
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: He was given an RE code of 4 and a separation code of KFS (voluntary discharge in lieu of trial by court-martial under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-20, chapter 10).