| Mr. Carl W. S. Chun | Director | |
| Mrs. Nancy Amos | Analyst |
| Mr. Mark D. Manning | Chairperson | |
| Mr. Lester Echols | Member | |
| Ms. Karen Y. Fletcher | Member |
APPLICANT REQUESTS: Reconsideration of his request to upgrade his undesirable discharge to a general discharge under honorable conditions.
APPLICANT STATES: That, except for his last period of being absent without leave (AWOL), his record indicates only minor offenses. He felt he had to go AWOL the last time to get out from under the commander who vowed to put him out of the service. He knows of two other people who did worse, one who had been AWOL for 30 years and the other a Native American, neither of whom wanted to be in the service but who got their discharges upgraded.
NEW EVIDENCE OR INFORMATION: Incorporated herein by reference are military records which were summarized in a memorandum prepared to reflect the Board's original consideration of his case on 16 August 2001 (docket number AR2001058046).
As additional evidence the applicant provides letters of support from his mother and from his brother.
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 has taken cognizance of the applicant’s age, family problems, and his good post-service conduct; however, none of these factors warrant the relief requested.
2. The applicant’s argument that others have had their discharges upgraded is insufficient. Each case is decided on its own merits when an applicant requests a change in discharge. Changes may be warranted if the Board determines that the characterization of service or the reason for discharge or both were improper or inequitable.
3. Many other men have entered the Army at a very young age and successfully completed their terms of service. It would not be equitable to grant the requested relief to the applicant considering his record of service.
4. The overall merits of the case, including the latest submissions and arguments, are insufficient as a basis for the Board to reverse its previous decision.
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
__mdm___ __le____ __kyf___ DENY APPLICATION
| CASE ID | AR2002068333 |
| SUFFIX | |
| RECON | |
| DATE BOARDED | 20020523 |
| TYPE OF DISCHARGE | UOTHC |
| DATE OF DISCHARGE | 19640724 |
| DISCHARGE AUTHORITY | AR 635-208 |
| DISCHARGE REASON | A50.00 |
| BOARD DECISION | (DENY) |
| REVIEW AUTHORITY | |
| ISSUES 1. | 110.00 |
| 2. | |
| 3. | |
| 4. | |
| 5. | |
| 6. |
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002082416C070215
The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein. APPLICANT REQUESTS : That his discharge for his last period of service be upgraded. 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...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002076813C070215
The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein. On 25 August 1981, he was separated with a UOTHC discharge under the provisions of chapter 10, Army Regulation 635-200. Although an honorable or a general discharge is authorized, a UOTHC discharge is normally considered appropriate.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2001 | 2001054182C070420
The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein. On 28 August 1985, the appropriate authority approved his request for discharge and directed that an UOTHC discharge be furnished and reduction to the lowest enlisted grade. On 12 February 2001, the Army Discharge Review Board advised the applicant that his request was past the 15 year statute and he should request an appeal of his discharge to the Army Board for...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2001 | 2001052466C070420
In accordance with Army Regulation 15-185, the application and the available military records pertinent to the corrective action requested were reviewed to determine whether to authorize a formal hearing, recommend that the records be corrected without a formal hearing, or to deny the application without a formal hearing if it is determined that insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate the existence of probable material error or injustice. The applicant requests...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2001 | 2001058672C070421
The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein. The applicant was discharged on 19 November 1993 under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 10, under other than honorable conditions, in lieu of trial by court-martial. On 18 June 2001 in an unanimous decision, the Army Discharge Review Board denied the applicant’s request to upgrade his discharge.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2003 | 2003090618C070212
THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE : On 28 August 2002 the Army Discharge Review Board denied the applicant's request to upgrade his discharge. The board again denied his request.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002083164C070215
In accordance with Army Regulation 15-185, the application and the available military records pertinent to the corrective action requested were reviewed to determine whether to authorize a formal hearing, recommend that the records be corrected without a formal hearing, or to deny the application without a formal hearing if it is determined that insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate the existence of probable material error or injustice. This Board also determined...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2001 | 2001063408C070421
The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein. APPLICANT STATES : That he had four years of good service. 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 | CY2002 | 2002075075C070403
The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein. It provides that, if a request for a reconsideration is received within one year of the prior consideration and the case has not been previously reconsidered, it will be resubmitted to the Board if there is evidence (including but not limited to any facts or arguments as to why relief should be granted. The review of his service record included consideration of his combat...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2003 | 2003087279C070212
The applicant’s Enlisted Qualification Record for his first enlistment indicates that during this first period of active duty service, he completed an overseas tour of duty in Korea, and he earned the National Defense Service Medal (NDSM). The separation document (DD Form 214) issued to him on the date of his separation from this period of active duty service indicates that up to that date he had earned the NDSM, Armed Forces Expeditionary Medal (AFEM), and the Army Good Conduct Medal...