| Mr. Carl W. S. Chun | Director | |
| Ms. Beverly A. Young | Analyst |
| Mr. Samuel A. Crumpler | Chairperson | |
| Mr. Kenneth W. Lapin | Member | |
| Mr. John T. Meixell | Member |
APPLICANT REQUESTS: That his discharge under other than honorable conditions (UOTHC) be upgraded to honorable.
APPLICANT STATES: That at the time of his discharge, he was under extreme stress, and his father had attempted suicide which affected him greatly. He also states that he was unable to think clearly because he was away from his family. He enjoyed the Army and wishes he could have handled things differently. He further states that he is an incarcerated veteran in Mount Pleasant, Iowa. Upon his release, he would like every chance possible to regain his life, for himself and for his family. He states that the incarcerated veterans at Mount Pleasant are very helpful to him and his first step is to correct his past. The applicant did not submit any evidence in support of his application.
EVIDENCE OF RECORD: The applicant's military records show:
The applicant enlisted in the Regular Army on 25 February 1980 for a period of three years. He successfully completed basic and advanced individual training and was assigned to Fort Lewis, Washington, as an assistant gunner.
Charges were preferred against the applicant on 16 December 1980 for stealing two shotguns, of a combined value of $285.00, and for unlawfully entering the truck of a staff sergeant.
On 29 December 1980, the applicant consulted 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, chapter 10. In doing so, he admitted guilt to the offenses charged and acknowledged that he might encounter substantial prejudice in civilian life and that he might be ineligible for many or all benefits administered by the Veterans Administration (VA) if an under other than honorable discharge were issued. He elected not to submit a statement in his own behalf.
On 8 January 1981, the separation authority approved the applicant’s request for discharge and directed issuance of an Under Other Than Honorable Conditions Discharge Certificate.
Accordingly, the applicant was discharged on 20 January 1981 under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 10, for the good of the service – in lieu of trial by court-martial. He had 10 months and 26 days of creditable service.
On 31 May 1983, the applicant applied to the Army Discharge Review Board (ADRB) for an upgrade of his discharge. On 6 October 1983, the ADRB determined that the applicant's discharge was proper and equitable and unanimously voted to deny his request.
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.
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's voluntary request for separation under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 10, for the good of the service, to avoid trial by court-martial, was administratively correct and in conformance with applicable regulations. There is no indication that the request was made under coercion or duress.
2. The applicant was advised of the effects of a discharge under other than honorable conditions and that he might be deprived of many or all Army and VA benefits. He was afforded the opportunity to submit statements in his own behalf, but he declined to do so.
3. The contentions of the applicant have been noted by the Board. However, these factors are not sufficiently mitigating to warrant an upgrade of his discharge.
4. There is no apparent error or injustice in this case on which to base recharacterization of the applicant's discharge to honorable.
5. 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.
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
SAC_____ KWL_____ JTM_____ DENY APPLICATION
| CASE ID | AR2002067956 |
| SUFFIX | |
| RECON | YYYYMMDD |
| DATE BOARDED | 20020407 |
| TYPE OF DISCHARGE | UOTHC |
| DATE OF DISCHARGE | 19810120 |
| DISCHARGE AUTHORITY | AR635-200,chapter 10 |
| DISCHARGE REASON | For the Good of the Service – in lieu of trial by court-martial |
| BOARD DECISION | DENY |
| REVIEW AUTHORITY | |
| ISSUES 1. | 144.0000 |
| 2. | |
| 3. | |
| 4. | |
| 5. | |
| 6. |
ARMY | BCMR | CY2012 | 20120022367
The applicant requests upgrade of his discharge under other than honorable conditions. On 11 December 1981, the separation authority approved the applicant's voluntary request for discharge and directed the issuance of an under other than honorable conditions discharge. Although an honorable or general discharge is authorized, a discharge under other than honorable conditions is normally considered appropriate.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002078874C070215
The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein. APPLICANT STATES : In effect, that at the time of his court-martial, he was not advised of his rights nor was he represented by counsel, which denied him due process. The ADRB denied his request on 29 April 1982.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100030423
THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE: 1. The applicant requests that his discharge under other than honorable conditions be upgraded to an honorable discharge, that his DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) be corrected to show that he was discharged in the pay grade of E-3 and that he was not court-martialed and that he be paid all back pay and allowances due him. The applicants DD Form 214 also properly reflects that he was reduced to the pay...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002072119C070403
The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein. APPLICANT REQUESTS: That his discharge under other than honorable conditions be upgraded to a general discharge. EVIDENCE OF RECORD : The applicant's military records show:
ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140017331
The applicant requests an upgrade of his discharge to an honorable discharge (HD) or a general discharge (GD). Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel. In the absence of evidence showing error or injustice in the separation authority's decision, there is an insufficient basis upon which to upgrade his discharge to an HD or a GD.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | AR20140008765
f. A review of the applicant's request for discharge and his counsel's portion of the document fails to show any evidence he was informed that after a two-year period his discharge would be "automatically" upgraded to a general discharge. The applicant contends his discharge should be upgraded because: * he was 16 years of age when his parents consented to his entry into the USAR * the Army recruiter may have improperly waived certain restrictions to allow him to enter the RA * Army...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002072158C070403
The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein. Accordingly, he was discharged under other than honorable conditions on 13 July 1983, under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 10, in lieu of trial by court-martial. 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...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080006694
THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE: 1. On 14 October 1983, the applicant was discharged from active duty under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 10 for the good of the service with an UOTHC discharge. The applicants service record shows he received two Article 15s, a letter of reprimand, and was charged with being AWOL for over 900 days.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2012 | 20120016908
In his request for discharge, he acknowledged he understood if the discharge request were approved, he might be discharged under other than honorable conditions and be furnished an Under Other Than Honorable Conditions Discharge Certificate. 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. His record of service shows he was AWOL for 45 days when he was returned to military control.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | 20110012414
On 4 February 1980, the separation authority approved the applicant's voluntary request for discharge and directed that he be furnished an under other than honorable conditions discharge. There is no evidence the applicant applied to the Army Discharge Review Board for upgrade of his discharge within its 15-year statute of limitations. _______ _ x _______ ___ CHAIRPERSON I certify that herein is recorded the true and complete record of the proceedings of the Army Board for Correction of...