| Mr. Carl W. S. Chun | Director | |
| Mr. Jessie B. Strickland | Analyst |
| Ms. Irene N. Wheelwright | Chairperson | |
| Ms. Kathleen A. Newman | Member | |
| Mr. Richard T. Dunbar | Member |
APPLICANT REQUESTS: That his discharge under other than honorable conditions be upgraded.
APPLICANT STATES: The applicant has offered no argument or evidence in support of his application.
EVIDENCE OF RECORD: The applicant's military records show:
He initially enlisted in the United States Army Reserve (USAR) on 2 May 1979 and served as a motor transport operator until he was honorably discharged on 12 February 1981, for the purpose of enlisting in the Regular Army.
He enlisted in the Regular Army on 13 February 1981 for a period of 3 years and assignment to Korea. He was transferred to Korea on 22 March 1981 and was assigned to an infantry battalion of the 2d Infantry Division for duty as a heavy vehicle operator. He was advanced to the pay grade of E-3 on 1 August 1981.
Although not present in the available records, it appears that nonjudicial punishment was imposed against him on 31 December 1981, because the applicant was reduced to the pay grade of E-2 on 31 December 1981.
He went absent without leave (AWOL) on 14 January to 25 January 1982 and his records show that he was reduced to the pay grade of E-1 on 6 February 1982. He again went AWOL on 20 February through 22 February 1982, when he was apprehended and returned to his unit.
On 1 April 1982, charges were preferred against him for stealing coins from a video machine, for receiving stolen coins, for being absent from his place of duty on 20 February 1982 and for being AWOL from 21 February to 22 February 1982.
On 21 April 1982, after consulting with counsel, the applicant submitted a request for discharge for the good of the service, under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 10, in lieu of trial by court-martial. In his request he indicated that he was making the request of his own free will, without coercion from anyone and that he was aware of the implications attached to his request. He also admitted that he was guilty of the charges against him or of lesser included offenses which authorized the imposition of a bad conduct or dishonorable discharge. He acknowledged that he understood that he could receive a discharge under other than honorable conditions and that he might be deprived of all benefits as a result of such a discharge. He further elected to submit a statement in his own behalf whereas he asserted that he was satisfied with the advice received from his counsel, that he understood that there were no automatic provisions for upgrading his discharge and that he understood he could expect to encounter substantial prejudice in civilian life where his discharge was concerned.
The appropriate authority (a major general) approved his request on 27 April 1982 and directed that he be discharged under other than honorable conditions.
Accordingly, he was discharged under other than honorable conditions on 5 May 1982, under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 10, in lieu of trial by court-martial. He had served 1 year, 2 months and 11 days of active service during his current enlistment and had 12 days of lost time due to AWOL.
Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel. Chapter 10 of the 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 charges have been preferred, submit a request for discharge for the good of the service in lieu of trial by court-martial. A condition of submitting such a request is that the individual concerned must admit guilt to the charges against them or of a lesser included offense which authorizes the imposition of a bad conduct or dishonorable discharge and they must indicate that they have been briefed and understand the consequences of such a request as well as the discharge they might receive. 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. 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 courtmartial, was administratively correct and in conformance with applicable regulations.
2. Accordingly, the type of discharge directed and the reasons therefore were appropriate under the circumstances.
3. After being afforded the opportunity to assert his innocence before a trial by court-martial, he voluntarily requested a discharge for the good of the service in hopes of avoiding a punitive discharge and having a felony conviction on his records. In doing so he admitted guilt to the charges against him. While he may now believes that he made the wrong choice, he should not be allowed to change his mind at this late date, especially considering the number and length of his absences as well as his otherwise undistinguished record of service during such a short period of time.
4. 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.
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
__rtd____ ___inw __ __kan___ DENY APPLICATION
| CASE ID | AR2002071034 |
| SUFFIX | |
| RECON | YYYYMMDD |
| DATE BOARDED | 2002/06/27 |
| TYPE OF DISCHARGE | UOTHC |
| DATE OF DISCHARGE | 1982/05/05 |
| DISCHARGE AUTHORITY | AR635-200/ch10 |
| DISCHARGE REASON | Gd of svc |
| BOARD DECISION | DENY |
| REVIEW AUTHORITY | |
| ISSUES 1. 689 | 144.7000/a70.00 |
| 2. | |
| 3. | |
| 4. | |
| 5. | |
| 6. |
ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140004774
THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE: 1. On 1 March 1982, the applicant submitted a request for discharge in lieu of trial by court-martial under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 10. On 23 March 1982, the appropriate authority (a brigadier general) approved his request for discharge and directed the issuance of an under other than honorable conditions discharge certificate.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2006 | 20060013758
The application submitted in this case was received on 27 September 2006. There is no evidence in the available records to show that the applicant ever applied to the Army Discharge Review Board for an upgrade of his discharge within that boards 15-year statute of limitations. A condition of submitting such a request is that the individual concerned must admit guilt to the charges against them or of a lesser included offense which authorizes the imposition of a bad conduct or dishonorable...
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.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090007414
The applicant requests that his discharge under other than honorable conditions be upgraded. The appropriate authority approved his request on 10 May 1982 and directed that he be discharged under other than honorable conditions. There is no evidence in the available records to show that he ever applied to the Army Discharge Review Board for an upgrade of his discharge within that board's 15-year statute of limitations.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002070796C070402
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 honorable. EVIDENCE OF RECORD : The applicant's military records show:
ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100013310
THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE: 1. The applicant requests that his discharge under other than honorable conditions be upgraded to a general discharge. On 19 July 1982, he went AWOL and remained absent in desertion until he surrendered to military authorities at Fort Gordon, Georgia, on 30 November 1982 and was transferred to Fort Bragg where charges were preferred against him on 7 December 1982 for the AWOL offense.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002080710C070215
The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein. The appropriate authority approved his request on 28 February 1983 and directed that he be discharged under other than honorable conditions. Accordingly, he was discharged under other than honorable conditions while on excess leave, on 18 March 1983, under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 10, in lieu of trial by court-martial.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2013 | 20130020941
Application for correction of military records (with supporting documents provided, if any). Subsequent to receiving this legal counsel, he voluntarily requested discharge for the good of the service in lieu of trial by court-martial under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations Enlisted Personnel), chapter 10. a. On 20 April 1988, the Army Discharge Review Board denied his request for an upgrade of his UOTHC discharge.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2004 | 20040011136C070208
His punishment consisted of a reduction to the pay grade of E-2 and a forfeiture of pay (both suspended until 9 October 1981, extra duty and restriction for 7 days. There is no evidence in the available records to show that he ever applied to the Army Discharge Review Board for an upgrade of his discharge within that board’s 15-year statute of limitations. A condition of submitting such a request is that the individual concerned must admit guilt to the charges against them or of a lesser...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140000900
On 25 February 1982, the separation authority approved his request for discharge under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 10, for the good of the service in lieu of trial by court-martial, with an under other than honorable conditions discharge and reduction to private/E-1. 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...