| Mr. Carl W. S. Chun | Director | |
| Ms. Stephanie Thompkins | Analyst |
| Ms. Joann H. Langston | Chairperson | |
| Mr. George D. Paxson | Member | |
| Mr. Charles Gainor | Member |
APPLICANT REQUESTS: That his discharge under other than honorable conditions (UOTHC) be upgraded to a general discharge under honorable conditions.
APPLICANT STATES: That his commander did not like him and stated he would make sure he never got back into the service. He also states that he had no frequent incidents of a discreditable nature with civil or military authorities. He only had one military and one civilian incident. He does not believe what he did deserves a bad conduct discharge and he is not asking for an honorable discharge. He submits his own statement, dated 19 December 2001, describing the circumstances surrounding his discharge, in support of his application.
EVIDENCE OF RECORD: The applicant's military records show:
He enlisted in the Reserve as a private, pay grade E-1, on 20 March 1979 with a waiver of moral eligibility for theft. He entered on active duty for training on 28 February 1980.
He attained the rank of pay grade E-2 on 19 December 1979.
On 2 May 1980, he was counseled for being caught by the Military Police with 18 black capsules, which were determined to be a controlled substance.
On 5 May 1980, he was counseled for failure to go to his appointed place of duty.
He was punished under Article 15, Uniform Code of Military Justice on 5 May 1980, for wrongful possession (18 unknown capsules, more or less), of a controlled substance. His punishment included reduction to pay grade E-1, forfeiture and confinement for 25 days.
On 2 June 1980, he was counseled regarding being dropped from the Supply Course as an academic failure. He failed the test three times. It was recommended he be eliminated under Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 14, for misconduct.
On 18 June 1980, he was counseled for overdose of numerous amounts of unknown pills. It was again recommended he be eliminated under Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 14, for misconduct.
On 27 June 1980, his commander recommended he be eliminated from the service for misconduct. On the same day, through counsel, the applicant acknowledged the proposed separation action, waived his rights to an appearance before a board of officers, and elected not to submit a statement in
his own behalf. He also acknowledged he understood the possible effects of a UOTHC discharge and the results of the issuance of such a discharge.
On 24 July 1980, the appropriate authority approved his discharge and directed the issuance of a UOTHC discharge certificate.
He was discharged on 1 August 1980 under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 14, for frequent incidents of a discreditable nature with civil or military authorities, in pay grade E-1. He was credited with 5 months and 3 days for this service.
On 5 February 1981, the Army Discharge Review Board denied his request for an upgrade of his discharge.
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, and 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. A discharge under other than honorable conditions is normally appropriate for a soldier discharged under this chapter. However, the separation authority may direct a general discharge if such is merited by the soldier’s overall record. Only a general court-martial convening authority may approve an honorable discharge or delegate approval authority for an honorable discharge under this provision of regulation.
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 view of the circumstances in this case, the applicant is not entitled to an upgrade of his discharge. He has not shown error, injustice, or inequity for the relief he now requests.
2. The Board has noted his contentions that his commander wanted to make sure he never got back into the service and he did not have frequent incidents of a discreditable nature with civil or military authorities, he only had one civil and military incident. However, the applicant’s discharge was equitable based on his record of misconduct. He was afforded the opportunity to appear before a board of officers, but he declined to do so. The applicant has submitted neither probative evidence nor a convincing argument in support of his request.
3. The Board also notes that applicant’s record of service was due to his own willful acts of misconduct and concludes that his discharge was proper and equitable.
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
_cg_____ __gdp___ __jhl___ DENY APPLICATION
| CASE ID | AR2002067676 |
| SUFFIX | |
| RECON | |
| DATE BOARDED | 20020425 |
| TYPE OF DISCHARGE | |
| DATE OF DISCHARGE | |
| DISCHARGE AUTHORITY | |
| DISCHARGE REASON | |
| BOARD DECISION | DENY |
| REVIEW AUTHORITY | |
| ISSUES 1. | A70 |
| 2. | |
| 3. | |
| 4. | |
| 5. | |
| 6. |
ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090007184
Application for correction of military records (with supporting documents provided, if any). On 30 March 1981, the separation authority approved the findings and recommendations of the board of officers in the applicant's case, and directed that the applicant be discharged under the provisions of paragraph 14-33b, Army Regulation 635-200 with an UOTHC discharge. All requirements of law and regulation were met, and the rights of the applicant were fully protected throughout the separation...
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 | CY2007 | 20070000705
There is no evidence that the applicant applied to the Army Discharge Review Board (ADRB) for an upgrade of his discharge within its 15-year statute of limitations. Army Regulation 635-5-1, in effect at that time, prescribed the specific authorities (regulatory, statutory, or other directives), the reasons for the separation of members from active military service, and the separation program designators to be used for these stated reasons. The regulation shows that the separation program...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2012 | 20120010252
On 5 September 1980, the separation authority approved the board's recommendation for discharge of the applicant and directed the applicant be discharged under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 14, paragraph 14-33b, for misconduct based upon frequent incidents of a discreditable nature with civil or military authority with an under other than honorable conditions discharge. While there is no evidence of record that shows the applicant was involved in any incidents of a...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2004 | 2004099943C070208
The Board considered the following evidence: Exhibit A - Application for correction of military records. Even if he had not been recommended for separation under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 14, there appears to have been no basis for a medical discharge. Evidence of record shows the same SSN was used at the time of the applicant's enlistment and his discharge from the Army.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2003 | 2003090022C070212
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. Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 3-7, provides that a general discharge is a separation from the Army under honorable conditions. 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:
ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080006095
On an unknown date, while at the U. S. Army Retraining Brigade, Fort Riley, KS, action was initiated to separate the applicant under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 14, for misconduct frequent involvement in incidents of a discreditable nature with civil or military authorities. On 17 July 1981, the applicant was discharged, with a discharge UOTHC, in pay grade E-1, under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 14, for misconduct, frequent involvement in...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2005 | 20050002789C070206
The battalion commander recommended that the applicant be separated with an UOTHC discharge because his service had been less than honorable. The applicant's DD Form 214 shows that on 25 February 1981, he was separated with an UOTHC discharge under the provisions of chapter 14, Army Regulation 635-200 for misconduct-frequent incidents of a discreditable nature with civil or military authorities. As a result, the Board further determined that there is no evidence provided which shows that...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002077837C070215
MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 1 April 2003 DOCKET NUMBER: AR2002077837 The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein. Carl W. S. Chun Director, Army Board for Correction of Military RecordsINDEXCASE IDAR2002077837SUFFIXRECONDATE BOARDED20030401TYPE OF DISCHARGE(UOTHC)DATE OF DISCHARGE19811015DISCHARGE AUTHORITYAR635-200, Chap 14DISCHARGE REASONA60.00BOARD DECISION(DENY)REVIEW AUTHORITYISSUES...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2013 | 20130007268
He was of no use to the Army. The separation/convening authority approved the discharge action and ordered the applicant discharged under the provisions of chapter 14 of Army Regulation 635-200 by reason of misconduct and directed he be furnished an Under Other Than Honorable Conditions Discharge Certificate. The applicant was discharged on 28 May 1980.