| Mr. Carl W. S. Chun | Director | |
| Mr. Jessie B. Strickland | Analyst |
| Mr. Luther L. Santiful | Chairperson | |
| Ms. Paula Mokulis | Member | |
| Mr. Donald P. Hupman | Member |
APPLICANT REQUESTS: That his discharge under other than honorable conditions be upgraded to honorable.
APPLICANT STATES: That he was charged with a crime he did not commit and was never court-martialed. He further states that he was told that he would be given an honorable discharge; however, that did not happen. He also states that his counsel informed him that he had a choice, either remain in the Army and let the false charge follow him around or accept an honorable discharge. He continues by stating that had he known he was not getting an honorable discharge, he would have remained in the Army. He asserts that he was one of the top 10 recruits in his platoon and one of the top 40 in the company. He continues by stating that he wants his discharge upgraded so that he will not be embarrassed when his son joins the military or when he tries to receive benefits.
EVIDENCE OF RECORD: The applicant's military records show:
He enlisted on 16 June 1978 for a period of 3 years. He completed his training at Fort Leonard Wood, Missouri, and was transferred to Germany on 14 October 1978, for duty as a heavy vehicle driver.
The facts and circumstances surrounding the applicant’s administrative discharge are not present in the available records. However, his records do contain a duly constituted report of separation (DD Form 214), which shows that the applicant was discharged under other than honorable conditions on 30 December 1978, under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 10, in lieu of trial by court-martial. He had served 6 months and 15 days of total active service.
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 board’s 15-year statute of limitations.
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 and there are no provisions for an automatic upgrade of such a 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. In the absence of evidence to the contrary, it must be presumed that the applicant’s administrative separation was accomplished in compliance with applicable regulations with no procedural errors which would tend to jeopardize his rights.
2. Accordingly, the type of discharge directed and the reasons therefore were appropriate under the circumstances.
3. Absent evidence to the contrary, it must also be presumed that 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 believe that he made the wrong choice, he should not be allowed to change his mind at this late date, especially considering 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
__ls ____ __pm___ __dh____ DENY APPLICATION
| CASE ID | AR2002071807 |
| SUFFIX | |
| RECON | YYYYMMDD |
| DATE BOARDED | 2002/08/06 |
| TYPE OF DISCHARGE | UOTHC |
| DATE OF DISCHARGE | 1978/12/30 |
| 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 | CY2002 | 2002078109C070215
The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein. 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...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002072697C070403
The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein. The appropriate authority (a major general) approved his request on 15 July 1980 and directed that he be discharged under other than honorable conditions. 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 | 2002071837C070403
The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein. APPLICANT STATES : That he voluntarily enlisted in the United States Army Reserve (USAR) because it was the right thing to do. 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:
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002069021C070402
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. 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 | CY2003 | 2003085405C070212
The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein. She goes on to state that she received orders to Fort Sill and went absent without leave (AWOL) for several days before turning herself in to a Selfridge, Michigan Army base. After being at Fort Sill for several weeks, her mother called her and told her that her uncle had died and she informed her commander that she wanted to go home for the funeral.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002071573C070402
The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein. 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 board’s 15-year statute of limitations. 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...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2001 | 2001059779C070421
The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein. The request was approved and the applicant was discharged under honorable conditions from the OKARNG on 23 October 1979, the same date he was ordered to active duty at Fort Leonard Wood, Missouri. Accordingly, he was discharged under other than honorable conditions on 23 October 1979 under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 10, in lieu of trial by court-martial.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2013 | 20130014423
There is no evidence in the available records to show he applied to the Army Discharge Review Board for an upgrade of his discharge within that board's 15-year statute of limitations. Although an honorable or general discharge is authorized, an undesirable discharge was considered appropriate at the time. In the absence of evidence to the contrary, it must be presumed that the applicant's voluntary request for separation under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 10, for the...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2001 | 2001058114C070420
The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein. 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. The applicant’s contention that he was informed...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2003 | 2003091653C070212
The applicant requests that his discharge under other than honorable conditions be upgraded to a more favorable discharge. The application submitted in this case is dated 3 May 2003. The applicant consulted with counsel on 15 June 1979, at which time the counsel again advised the applicant of his rights and the repercussions of requesting and/or receiving a discharge under other than honorable conditions.