| Mr. Carl W. S. Chun | Director | |
| Ms. Stephanie Thompkins | Analyst |
| Ms. Karol A. Kennedy | Chairperson | |
| Mr. Melvin H. Meyer | Member | |
| Mr. Allen L. Raub | Member |
APPLICANT REQUESTS: In effect, that her discharge under other than honorable conditions (UOTHC) be upgraded to a general discharge, under honorable conditions.
APPLICANT STATES: That she was just married and found out she was pregnant and was no longer able to deal with the stress of military life. Her daughter was born on 25 August 1982 and then a son on 4 August 1983. She suffered an epilepsy stroke in December 1985 and another in 1990. She also states that she was not able to adapt to military life and her records should show that there were ongoing personal problems. Her discharge was inequitable because of one isolated incident in 28 months of service with no adverse action.
EVIDENCE OF RECORD: The applicant's military records show:
She enlisted in the Reserve, Delayed Entry Program on 18 February 1981.
She enlisted in the Regular Army for 3 years, as a private, pay grade E-1 on 24 March 1981.
She completed her basic and advance training and was assigned military occupational specialty as a food service specialist on 20 July 1981.
She was advanced to pay grade E-2 on 1 December 1981.
She was reported absent without leave (AWOL) on 24 December 1981 and returned to military control on 1 January 1982.
She was reported AWOL on 4 January 1982 and dropped from the rolls as a deserted on 2 February 1982.
She surrendered to military authorities on 10 October 1983.
On 19 October 1983, she was charged with 1 specification of AWOL from 24 December 1981 to 1 January 1982 and 1 specification of AWOL from 4 January 1982 to 18 October 1983.
On 21 October 1983, after consulting with legal counsel, the applicant voluntarily requested discharge for the good of the service in lieu of court-martial. She stated that she went AWOL because of personal problems and prior to going AWOL she used her chain of command to solve her problems. She acknowledged she understood the consequences of a discharge UOTHC and under no circumstances did she desire further rehabilitation and had no desire to perform further military service.
On 26 October 1983, her command recommended approval of her request and that a UOTHC discharge certificate be issued. Her commander states that the applicant had no motivation for continued service and would not respond to either counseling or rehabilitation.
On 31 October 1983, the appropriate authority approved her request for discharge and directed that a UOTHC discharge certificate be furnished and reduction to the lowest enlisted grade.
She was separated on 2 December 1983, under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 10, for the good of the service – in lieu of court-martial, in pay grade E-1. She was credited with 10 months and 21 days net active service and time lost due to AWOL from 25 December to 28 December 1981 and 4 January 1982 to 17 October 1983.
There is no evidence that the applicant applied to the Army Discharge Review Board within its 15-year statute of limitations.
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 UOTHC 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 view of the circumstances in this case, the applicant is not entitled to an upgrade of her discharge. She has not shown error, injustice, or inequity for the relief she now requests.
2. Her contentions that she was unable to deal with the stress of military life, her ongoing personal problems and that her discharge was based on one isolated incident in 28 months of service with no other adverse action have been noted by the Board. However, the applicant departed AWOL for a period of over 20 months, a serious instance of misconduct punishable by court-martial. Her command stated that the applicant had no motivation for continued service and would not respond to either counseling or rehabilitation. It is also noted that she has not shown she sought help within her command for her personal problems prior to going AWOL.
3. The applicant chose to request an administrative discharge rather than risk the consequences of a court-martial. Although she may now feel that she made the wrong choice, she should not be allowed to change her mind at this late date.
4. The Board also notes her contentions that she suffered an epilepsy stroke in 1985 and another in 1990. However, while the Board is empathetic, the applicant's current stated medical problems are not sufficiently mitigating to warrant an upgrade of her 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.
BOARD VOTE:
________ ________ ________ GRANT
________ ________ ________ GRANT FORMAL HEARING
_mmm____ __alr___ _kak____ DENY APPLICATION
| CASE ID | AR2002071013 |
| SUFFIX | |
| RECON | |
| DATE BOARDED | 20020618 |
| TYPE OF DISCHARGE | |
| DATE OF DISCHARGE | |
| DISCHARGE AUTHORITY | |
| DISCHARGE REASON | |
| BOARD DECISION | DENY |
| REVIEW AUTHORITY | |
| ISSUES 1. | A70 |
| 2. | |
| 3. | |
| 4. | |
| 5. | |
| 6. |
ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090012931
Application for correction of military records (with supporting documents provided, if any). It further shows she was discharged under the provisions of chapter 10, Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations - Enlisted Personnel) and that the reason for her discharge was for the good of the service in lieu of court-martial; and that she received a UOTHC discharge. Therefore, her overall record of service did not support the issue of an HD or GD by the separation authority at the time...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2001 | 2001060360C070421
On 5 December 1981, the applicant submitted a DA Form 4187 (Personnel Action) for a hardship discharge. On 11 February 1983, the applicant’s unit commander recommended that his request for discharge be approved with a UOTHC discharge. There is nothing in the applicant's record, and he has provided nothing, that indicates his recruiter promised him he would be allowed to continue his boxing career in the military.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140004969
He states: * a UOTHC discharge seems too severe at the time it was issued based on his military service records * his first years in the military were good and his record of promotions shows he was generally a good service member * his average conduct and efficiency ratings/marks were pretty good * he did not have any problems until he was assigned to Fort Polk * his record of nonjudicial punishments (NJP) under Article 15, Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) indicate minor offenses 3. ...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2004 | 20040008652C070208
THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE: 1. On 27 June 1983, the separation authority approved the applicant’s request for discharge and directed that she be discharged for the good of the service under other than honorable conditions and furnished an Under Other Than Honorable Conditions Discharge Certificate. In order to justify correction of a military record the applicant must show or it must otherwise satisfactorily appear, that the record is in error or unjust.
ARMY | BCMR | CY1997 | 9710646C070209
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. Although the Army Discharge Review Board denied his application for upgrade, and although the applicant failed to apply to this board within the time required, it...
ARMY | BCMR | CY1997 | 9710646
On 20 January 1982, he 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 UOTHC discharge. Although the Army Discharge Review Board denied his application for upgrade, and although the applicant failed to apply to this board within the time required, it would nonetheless be fair and equitable to upgrade the applicant’s UOTHC discharge to a general discharge in consideration of his prior good service and his...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2003 | 2003083452C070212
The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein. On 16 March 1982, the separation authority approved the request and directed that the applicant be reduced to pay grade E-1 and separated with a UOTHC discharge. On 15 March 1991, the Army Discharge Review Board denied the applicant’s request for an upgrade of her discharge.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2003 | 2003087635C070212
The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein. COUNSEL CONTENDS : That this Board consider all of the evidence of record to include the letters that the applicant’s submitted attesting to his post-service conduct. On 8 February 1983, the Army Discharge Review Board denied the applicant’s request for an upgrade of his discharge.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2004 | 20040005386C070208
On 6 January 1982, the approval authority approved the applicant's request for discharge under the provisions of chapter 10, Army Regulation 635-200 and directed that he be separated with a UOTHC discharge in pay grade E-1. The applicant's DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) shows that, on 23 February 1982, the applicant was separated under the provisions of chapter 10, Army Regulation 635-200 with a UOTHC discharge, due to conduct triable by court-martial. ...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002076226C070215
The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein. He further states that he did not want to enlist at the time but had no choice under the circumstances. He also states that he was ill-prepared mentally to be in the Army and did not receive the medical assistance he needed at the time to deal with what he considered a miserable and depressing environment.