| Mr. Carl W. S. Chun | Director | |
| Mr. Vic Whitney | Analyst |
| Mr. Ted S. Kanamine | Chairperson | |
| Mr. Harry B. Oberg | Member | |
| Mr. John T. Meixell | Member |
APPLICANT REQUESTS: In effect, that his discharge under other than honorable conditions by upgraded to under honorable conditions.
APPLICANT STATES: That he wants his benefits as a veteran restored because he was not convicted of the felony he was charged with.
EVIDENCE OF RECORD: The applicant's military records show:
He enlisted and entered active duty on 20 July 1983. He was trained as a construction equipment repairer and was assigned to Germany until 14 November 1985. He had been promoted to the pay grade of E-4 effective 1 April 1985. He reenlisted on 30 January 1987.
While assigned to Fort Devens, Massachusetts, on 16 September 1988, the applicant submitted a request for discharge for the good of the service in lieu of trial by court-martial. The applicant had consulted with counsel and acknowledged the charges that had been preferred against him. He acknowledged that he was guilty of the charges that could result in a bad conduct or dishonorable discharge. He stated that he did not desire further rehabilitation or further military service. He also acknowledged that he might be deprived of many or all benefits as a veteran and might encounter substantial prejudice in civilian life based on the discharge he might receive. Neither the charge sheet nor a statement in his own behalf is in the available record.
The applicant's chain of command recommended approval of the request with a discharge under other than honorable conditions. On 6 October 1988, the separation authority, a major general, approved the request and directed separation in the lowest enlisted grade under other than honorable conditions.
Effective 13 October 1988, the applicant was separated under other than honorable conditions under the authority of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 10. He had 5 years, 2 months, and 24 days creditable service and no lost time.
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.
On 8 November 2000, the Army Discharge Review Board denied the applicant's request for an upgrade of his discharge.
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 was advised of the effects of a discharge under other than honorable conditions and that he might be deprived of many or all benefits as a veteran. The applicant chose to request an administrative discharge rather than risk the consequences of a court-martial.
2. In the absence of evidence to the contrary, it is presumed that the discharge proceedings were conducted in accordance with law and regulations applicable at the time. The type of discharge directed and the reasons therefore were appropriate considering all the available facts of the case.
3. 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
__tk___ __ho___ ___jm_____ DENY APPLICATION
| CASE ID | AR2002068869 |
| SUFFIX | |
| RECON | |
| DATE BOARDED | 20020711 |
| TYPE OF DISCHARGE | UOTHC |
| DATE OF DISCHARGE | 19881013 |
| DISCHARGE AUTHORITY | AR 635-200, CHAP 10 |
| DISCHARGE REASON | A70.00 |
| BOARD DECISION | DENY |
| REVIEW AUTHORITY | |
| ISSUES 1. | 110.02 |
| 2. | |
| 3. | |
| 4. | |
| 5. | |
| 6. |
ARMY | BCMR | CY2006 | 20060014566
In his request the applicant stated he understood he could request discharge for the good of the service because charges had been filed against him under the UCMJ, which could authorize the imposition of a bad conduct or dishonorable discharge. The applicant stated that he understood that if his request were accepted, he could be discharged under other than honorable conditions and furnished an under other than honorable conditions discharge certificate. In order to justify correction of a...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2013 | 20130010389
The applicant requests an upgrade of his discharge under other than honorable conditions. On 3 March 1988, the separation authority approved the applicant's voluntary request for discharge and directed his discharge under other than honorable conditions with reduction in rank to private/E-1. ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20130010389 3 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 1 ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20130010389 2 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2006 | 20060010407C071029
Donald L. Lewy | |Member | The Board considered the following evidence: Exhibit A - Application for correction of military records. The applicant states he was discharged with an honorable discharge his first enlistment. Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 3-7b, provides that a general discharge is a separation from the Army under honorable conditions.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2006 | 20060007160C070205
THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE: 1. Accordingly, the applicant was discharged under other than honorable conditions on 25 March 1988 under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 10, for the good of the service, in lieu of court-martial. Therefore, the applicant's record of service is insufficiently meritorious to warrant an honorable discharge or a general discharge.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090009855
On 31 October 1988, the separation authority approved the applicant's voluntary request for discharge and directed that she be furnished an under other than honorable conditions discharge. Accordingly, the applicant was discharged under other than honorable conditions on 3 November 1988 under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 10, for the good of the service in lieu of trial by court-martial. Therefore, the applicant's record of service is insufficiently meritorious to...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100027919
He acknowledged he understood if his discharge request was approved, he would normally be discharged under conditions other than honorable. Although an honorable or general discharge is authorized, a discharge under other than honorable conditions is normally considered appropriate. ____________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 | CY2005 | 20050001069C070206
THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE: 1. The applicant requests that his discharge under other than honorable conditions be upgraded to honorable. Although an honorable or general discharge is authorized, a discharge under other than honorable conditions is normally considered appropriate.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2006 | 20060000292C070205
On 26 March 1985, the separation authority approved the applicant’s request for discharge and directed that he receive an under other than honorable conditions discharge. Army policy states that although an honorable or general discharge is authorized, a discharge under other than honorable conditions is normally considered appropriate. The evidence of record shows the applicant had 1,804 days of lost time due to AWOL, an offense punishable by a punitive discharge.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140016073
On 13 February 1985, following consultation with legal counsel, the applicant requested discharge under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations - Enlisted Personnel), chapter 10, for the good of the service - in lieu of trial by court-martial. 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...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2006 | 20060015659
On 26 May 1988, the applicant consulted with legal counsel and was advised of the basis for the contemplated trial by court-martial, the maximum permissible punishment authorized under the UCMJ, the possible effects of an under other than honorable conditions discharge, and of the procedures and rights that were available to her. Subsequent to receiving this legal counsel, the applicant voluntarily requested discharge for the good of the service, in lieu of trial by court-martial. In her...