| Mr. Carl W. S. Chun | Director | |
| Mrs. Joyce A. Hall | Analyst |
| Ms. Irene N. Wheelwright | Chairperson | ||
| Ms. Kathleen A. Newman | Member | ||
| Mr. Richard T. Dunbar | Member |
APPLICANT REQUESTS: In effect, that his general discharge (GD) be upgraded to honorable. (The record of evidence shows that the applicant received an Under Other Than Honorable Conditions (UOTHC) discharge).
APPLICANT STATES: In effect, that he joined the Army in 1979. He became a father in November of the same year. He was sending money home to provide for his daughter, however, it became harder to provide for her because of a build up of other expenses. In the spring of 1980, he returned home on leave and found his daughter and her mother going through many hardships. He stayed home longer than he was authorized, which is considered being absent without leave (AWOL). He did not return to his command because his family needed him at that time. The military wasn’t paying as much as someone working an eight to five job. In the fall of 1980, he returned to his command. He was given the option of an Article 15 or a GD. He opted for the discharge in order to care for his family.
EVIDENCE OF RECORD: The applicant's military records show:
On 13 November 1979, the applicant enlisted in the Regular Army for 4 years.
He completed the required training and was awarded military occupational specialty 13B10 (Cannon Crewman). Highest pay grade he achieved was pay grade E-2.
On 1 August 1980, the applicant was reported AWOL from B Battery, 1st Battalion, 84th Field Artillery, located at Fort Lewis, Washington. On
31 August 1980, the applicant was dropped from the rolls. On 6 October
1980, the applicant returned to his command and surrendered to military authority.
On 10 October 1980, court-martial charges were preferred against the applicant for being AWOL from 1 August to 6 October 1980.
On 14 October 1980, the applicant consulted with legal counsel and voluntarily requested a discharge under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 10, for the good of the service in lieu of trial by court-martial. 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 Veterans Administration benefits. He submitted a statement in his behalf. He was afforded the opportunity to submit statements in his behalf, but declined to do so.
A mental and a physical evaluation found the applicant fit for separation.
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. 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.
2. 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.
3. The type of discharge directed and the reasons therefore were appropriate considering all the facts of the case.
4. 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
_ _INW_ _ __KAN__ __RTD__ DENY APPLICATION
| CASE ID | AR2002069115 |
| SUFFIX | |
| RECON | YYYYMMDD |
| DATE BOARDED | 2002/06/27 |
| TYPE OF DISCHARGE | UOTHC |
| DATE OF DISCHARGE | 1980/10/30 |
| DISCHARGE AUTHORITY | AR635-200 |
| DISCHARGE REASON | A70.00 |
| BOARD DECISION | DENY |
| REVIEW AUTHORITY | |
| ISSUES 1. | 144.7000 |
| 2. | |
| 3. | |
| 4. | |
| 5. | |
| 6. |
ARMY | BCMR | CY2015 | 20150001435
Application for correction of military records (with supporting documents provided, if any). In his request for discharge, he indicated he understood that if his request for discharge was accepted, he could be discharged under other than honorable conditions and be furnished an Under Other Than Honorable Conditions Discharge Certificate. The applicant's record contains no documentation that shows he submitted a request for a hardship discharge or compassionate reassignment.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2013 | 20130019656
The applicant requests an upgrade of his under other than honorable conditions discharge. 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 he applied to the Army Discharge Review Board for an upgrade of his discharge within that board's 15-year statute of limitations.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140000357
Their father was the sole provider for the family until the applicant began sending a $250.00 monthly allotment home to help the family. d. The applicant didn't tell their father that he had left his duties in the military until sometime later. Although an honorable or general discharge is authorized, a UOTHC discharge is normally considered appropriate.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090011272
He states that he obtained employment and adds that the 6 months he was in an AWOL status was the most stressful period of his life. The applicant's DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) shows he was discharged on 21 August 1980 in accordance with the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations - Enlisted Personnel), chapter 10, in lieu of trial by court-martial, and his service was characterized as under other than honorable conditions. There...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080010611
In his request for discharge, the applicant indicated that he understood that by requesting discharge, he was admitting guilt to the charges against him, or of a lesser included offense, that also authorized the imposition of a bad conduct discharge or a discharge under other honorable conditions. Although an honorable or general discharge is authorized, a discharge under other than honorable conditions is normally considered appropriate. The evidence of record shows that the applicant was...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090000606
On 27 May 1981, the applicant was accordingly discharged. The DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) he was issued at the time of his discharge shows he was discharged for the good of the service in lieu of a court-martial with a character of service of under other than honorable conditions. There is no evidence in the applicants records and the applicant did not provide any evidence that shows he was pending a medical discharge or that his AWOL was caused by...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002072759C070403
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 either an honorable or medical discharge. APPLICANT STATES : In effect, that he should have been discharged by reason of medical disability because he was addicted to drugs and alcohol and was never offered any help for his illness.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2013 | 20130015355
The applicant requests that his discharge under other than honorable conditions be upgraded to a general discharge. He returned at 2330 hours and learned the next day that he had been reported as being absent without leave (AWOL) and would be offered a discharge in lieu of trial by court-martial. There is no evidence in the available records to show that he applied to the Army Discharge Review Board for an upgrade of his discharge within that board's 15-year statute of limitations.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100030049
Application for correction of military records (with supporting documents provided, if any). The applicant requests a discharge upgrade. After being AWOL 196 days the applicant returned to military control at the Personnel Control Facility (PCF), Fort Bragg, NC.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140009165
BOARD DATE: 29 January 2015 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20140009165 THE BOARD CONSIDERED THE FOLLOWING EVIDENCE: 1. Although an honorable or general discharge is authorized, a discharge under other than honorable conditions is normally considered appropriate. However, his record contains court-martial charges for being AWOL as well as a DD Form 214 that shows he was discharged under other than honorable conditions in lieu of trial by court-martial on 27 February 1980 under the provisions of Army...