| Mr. Carl W. S. Chun | Director | |
| Mr. G. E. Vandenberg | Analyst |
| Mr. Fred N. Eichorn | Chairperson | |
| Ms. Barbara J. Ellis | Member | |
| Mr. William D. Barr | Member |
APPLICANT REQUESTS: That his discharge under other than honorable conditions (UOTHC) be upgraded.
APPLICANT STATES: That he has been a good citizen and not in any trouble since his discharge and that he would reenlist if he could. In a request to his Congressman for assistance, he states that he was young and stupid. He states that his mother lied telling him she was dying which is why he was AWOL (absent without leave).
EVIDENCE OF RECORD: The applicant's military records show:
The applicant entered active duty on 16 September 1982 at age 20. He completed basic combat training and advanced individual training without reported incidents.
On 6 February 1984, the applicant received nonjudicial punishment (NJP) under the provisions of Article 15, Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) for failure to go to his appointed place of duty.
On 30 March 1984, court-martial charges were preferred for violation of Article 86, UCMJ, AWOL for the period 17 February 1984 through 23 March 1984.
On 30 April 1984, after consulting with counsel, the applicant requested discharge for the good of the service in lieu of trial by court-martial. He waived his right to make a statement on his own behalf and to have counsel.
In the recommendation for discharge from the Staff Judge Advocate, it was noted that the applicant had no prior convictions but had received NJP on two occasions. Only the 6 February 1984 NJP is of record.
On 4 May 1984, the discharge authority approved the request for discharge, dismissed the court-martial charges pending, directed that the applicant be reduced to grade of private (E-1), and directed that the applicant receive a Under Other Than Honorable Conditions Discharge Certificate.
On 8 May 1984, the applicant waived his right to a separation medical examination.
On 10 May 1984, the applicant was separated under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 10. He had served 1 year, 6 months and 20 days creditable service and had 36 days 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 at any time after the charges have been preferred, submit a request for discharge for the good of the service in lieu of trial by court-martial. A discharge under other than honorable conditions is normally considered appropriate.
The Manual for Courts-Martial, Table of Maximum Punishments, sets forth the maximum punishments for offenses chargeable under the UCMJ. A punitive discharge is authorized for offenses under Article 86, for periods of AWOL in excess of 30 days.
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 contention that he was young and immature at the time of his discharge is not sufficiently mitigating to warrant relief. The Board notes that the applicant was 22 years of age when he went AWOL. He had satisfactory completed training and had served for over a year before any negative incidents are documented. His satisfactory performance demonstrates his capacity to serve.
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.
3. 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. The character of the discharge is commensurate with his overall record and the offense for which he voluntarily requested discharge.
4. The applicant's request for an upgrade based on good post-service conduct is noted however; there is no evidence of record nor does the applicant provide any documentation of activities that are so exceptionally meritorious as to outweigh the offense that resulted in his discharge.
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.
| CASE ID | AR2002070469 |
| SUFFIX | |
| RECON | |
| DATE BOARDED | |
| TYPE OF DISCHARGE | 20020910 |
| DATE OF DISCHARGE | |
| DISCHARGE AUTHORITY | |
| DISCHARGE REASON | |
| BOARD DECISION | DENY |
| REVIEW AUTHORITY | |
| ISSUES 1. | 144.70 |
| 2. | 144.9301 |
| 3. | 144.9307 |
| 4. | |
| 5. | |
| 6. |
ARMY | BCMR | CY2001 | 2001061290C070421
The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein. On 31 December 1984, the applicant was discharged, in pay grade E-1, under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 10, for the good of the service with a discharge under other than honorable conditions. The applicant declined counsel, waived his right to a hearing before a board of officers, and acknowledged that he understood the effects of discharge under...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002079338C070215
The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein. EVIDENCE OF RECORD : The applicant's military records show:The applicant entered active duty on 5 October 1979 at age 24. The Board notes that the applicant was 24 years of age at the time he enlisted, had satisfactory completed basic and advanced training and had served for five months in Germany before going AWOL.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2013 | 20130016201
The applicant requests his under other than honorable conditions discharge be upgraded to a general discharge. 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. Records show he was 21 years of age at the time of his last offense.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2003 | 2003084216C070212
On the same date, the applicant’s unit commander recommended that his request for discharge be approved with a UOTHC discharge. There is no evidence in the available records to indicate that the applicant ever applied to the Army Discharge Review Board for an upgrade of his discharge within that board's 15-year statute of limitations. Chapter 10 of that regulation provides, in pertinent part, that a member who has committed an offense or offenses for which the authorized punishment...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090020743
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. The DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) he was issued shows he was discharged for the good of the service - in lieu of court-martial with a characterization of service...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2005 | 20050013169C070206
Donald L. Lewy | |Member | The Board considered the following evidence: Exhibit A - Application for correction of military records. On 21 February 1983, the applicant was honorably discharged after serving 3 years, 11 months, and 16 days of active military service. On 26 March 1984, the separation authority approved the applicant’s request for discharge and directed that he be reduced to the grade of E-1 and issued an Under Other Than Honorable Conditions Discharge Certificate.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002069578C070402
The Board also took into consideration the applicant’s age at the time of his enlistment. The Board took into consideration the applicant's entire record of service and was convinced that both the reason for discharge and the characterization of service were appropriate considering the facts surrounding his discharge. Carl W. S. Chun Director, Army Board for Correction of Military RecordsINDEXCASE IDAR2002069578SUFFIXRECONDATE BOARDED20020813TYPE OF DISCHARGE(UOTHC)DATE OF...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080000024
On 18 September 1984, the separation authority approved the applicants request for discharge and directed that he be discharged under other than honorable conditions. On 23 October 1984, the applicant was discharged accordingly. There is no indication that the applicant applied to the Army Discharge Review Board for an upgrade of his discharge within its 15-year statute of limitations.
ARMY | BCMR | CY1997 | 9709087
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 the application was filed within the time established by statute, and if not, whether it would be in the interest of justice to waive the failure to timely file. APPLICANT REQUESTS: That his records be corrected by upgrading his discharge to honorable. The applicant has not presented and the records do not contain...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2005 | 20050003632C070206
The applicant requests that his records be corrected by upgrading his discharge to honorable. On 21 September 1981, the Army Discharge Review Board denied the applicant's petition to upgrade his discharge. Presidential Proclamation 4313, issued on 16 September 1974, provided for the issuance of a clemency discharge to certain former soldiers who voluntarily entered into and completed an alternate restitution program specifically designed for former soldiers who received a less...