| 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 a more favorable discharge.
APPLICANT STATES: That he has changed his behavior, has become a responsible citizen and desires to have his discharge upgraded.
EVIDENCE OF RECORD: The applicant's military records show:
He enlisted on 30 August 1976, for a period of 3 years and training as a food service specialist. He completed his training and served in both Korea and Fort Hood, Texas, before he was advanced to the pay grade of E-4 on 3 March 1978.
On 17 March 1980, while stationed at Fort Hood, he reenlisted for a period of 3 years and assignment back to Korea. He was promoted to the pay grade of E-5 on 13 May 1980. Nonjudicial punishment was imposed against him on two occasions for failure to go to his place of duty.
He was transferred to Korea on 23 October 1980 and on 21 July 1981, nonjudicial punishment was imposed against him for stealing food from the dining facility. His punishment consisted of a reduction to the pay grade of E-4 (suspended for 180 days) and a forfeiture of pay. The suspended punishment was vacated on 14 August 1981.
On 5 September 1981, he was convicted by a special court-martial of five specifications of failure to go to his place of duty, being absent without leave (AWOL) from 14 August to 16 August 1981, disobeying a lawful order from a commissioned officer, disobeying a lawful order from a senior noncommissioned officer, and the wrongful possession of an unauthorized liberty pass. He was sentenced to confinement at hard labor for 30 days and a reduction to the pay grade of E-1. He was transferred to the Army Retraining Brigade at Fort Riley, Kansas, on 17 September 1981, to serve his confinement.
On 6 October 1981, nonjudicial punishment was imposed against him for the wrongful possession of marijuana. His punishment consisted of a forfeiture of pay, extra duty and restriction.
On 9 November 1981, the applicant’s commander notified him that he was recommending that he be discharged under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 14, for misconduct due to his frequent involvement in incidents of a discreditable nature with civil or military authorities. After consulting with counsel, the applicant waived his rights and elected not to submit a statement in his own behalf.
The commander initiated the recommendation for discharge and cited the applicant’s disciplinary record and his failure to respond to numerous counseling sessions and rehabilitation efforts by the staff of the Retraining Brigade. He also provided an in-depth listing of the applicant’s offenses while at the Retraining Brigade, which included multiple incidents of disobeying lawful orders, failure to repair, unsatisfactory behavior, illegal possession of marijuana and alcohol, security violations and failure to maintain his living area and personal appearance. He further indicated that the applicant demonstrated little desire to return to duty and his failure to react constructively to the rehabilitation program was indicative that he should not be retained in the service.
The appropriate authority approved the recommendation for discharge on 18 November 1981 and directed that he be discharged under other than honorable conditions.
Accordingly, he was discharged under other than honorable conditions on 24 November 1981, under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 14-33b(1), for misconduct due to frequent involvement in incidents of a discreditable nature with civil or military authorities. He had served 5 years, 1 month and 29 days of total active service and had 26 days of lost time due to AWOL and imprisonment.
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 14 establishes policy and procedures for separating personnel for misconduct. Specific categories include minor infractions, a pattern of misconduct, commission of a serious offense, frequent involvement in incidents of a discreditable nature with civil or military authorities, conviction by civil authorities, desertion or absence without leave. 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 administrative separation was accomplished in compliance with applicable regulations with no procedural errors, which would tend to jeopardize his rights. Accordingly, the type of discharge directed and the reasons therefore were appropriate considering all of the facts of the case.
3. The applicant’s contentions have been noted by the Board. However, they are not sufficiently mitigating to warrant relief when compared to his overall record of service and the circumstances in his 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
___ls ___ __pm___ __dh____ DENY APPLICATION
| CASE ID | AR2002072054 |
| SUFFIX | |
| RECON | YYYYMMDD |
| DATE BOARDED | 2002/08/06 |
| TYPE OF DISCHARGE | UOTHC |
| DATE OF DISCHARGE | 1981/11/24 |
| DISCHARGE AUTHORITY | AR635-200/ch14 |
| DISCHARGE REASON | Misconduct |
| BOARD DECISION | DENY |
| REVIEW AUTHORITY | |
| ISSUES 1. 626 | 144.600/a60.00 |
| 2. | |
| 3. | |
| 4. | |
| 5. | |
| 6. |
ARMY | BCMR | CY2004 | 2004099943C070208
The Board considered the following evidence: Exhibit A - Application for correction of military records. Even if he had not been recommended for separation under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 14, there appears to have been no basis for a medical discharge. Evidence of record shows the same SSN was used at the time of the applicant's enlistment and his discharge from the Army.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | 20110006810
On 25 August 1981, the separation/convening authority approved the findings and recommendations of the administrative separation board and ordered the applicant's discharged under the provisions of chapter 14 of Army Regulation 635-200 by reason of misconduct and directed he be furnished an Under Other Than Honorable Conditions Discharge Certificate. Army Regulation 635-200, in effect at the time, set forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel. Army Regulation...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100029871
There is no evidence in the available records to show 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. Paragraph 3-7b of Army Regulation 635-200 also provides that a general discharge is a separation from the Army under honorable conditions. Therefore, the Board determined the overall merits of this case are insufficient as a basis for correction of the records of the individual concerned.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2005 | 20050004334C070206
The applicant’s military records are incomplete; however, the available records show that he enlisted in the Regular Army on 24 August 1979. 3. Review of the applicant’s record of service shows that he had various incidents of misconduct, 3 nonjudicial punishments, 1 court-martial and 128 days of lost time due to AWOL and confinement. Records indicate that the applicant was 19 years old at the time his discharge.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2013 | 20130014452
On 25 February 1981, the separation authority approved the applicant's discharge under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 14, and directed the issuance of an Under Other Than Honorable Conditions Discharge Certificate. His DD Form 214 confirms he was discharged by reason of misconduct frequent involvement in incidents of a discreditable nature with civil or military authorities in accordance with paragraph 14-33b(1) of Army Regulation 635-200 with a character of service of...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090005591
Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 3-7b, provides that a general discharge is a separation from the Army under honorable conditions. When authorized, it is issued to a Soldier whose military record is satisfactory but not sufficiently meritorious to warrant an honorable discharge. ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20090005591 3 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 1 ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20090005591 4 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2013 | 20130012656
On 20 October 1981, the applicant's immediate commander notified him of his intent to initiate separation action against him in accordance with chapter 14 of Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations - Enlisted Personnel) for misconduct - frequent involvement in incidents of a discreditable nature with civil or military authorities. On 3 November 1981, the separation authority approved the applicant's discharge under the provisions of chapter 14 of Army Regulation 635-200 by reason of...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2006 | 20060004042C070205
He was sentenced to perform 45 days of extra duty, to be restricted for 45 days, and to forfeit $311 pay per month for 1 month. When authorized, it is issued to a Soldier whose military record is satisfactory but not sufficiently meritorious to warrant an honorable discharge. Evidence of record shows the applicant had three nonjudicial punishments, one summary court-martial conviction, and one special court-martial conviction prior to being sent to the Retraining Brigade.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2003 | 2003088025C070403
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: On 22 January 1982, the applicant's commander at the Retraining Brigade submitted a recommendation to discharge the applicant from the service under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 14, for misconduct due to frequent involvement in incidents of a discreditable nature with military authorities.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080006095
On an unknown date, while at the U. S. Army Retraining Brigade, Fort Riley, KS, action was initiated to separate the applicant under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 14, for misconduct frequent involvement in incidents of a discreditable nature with civil or military authorities. On 17 July 1981, the applicant was discharged, with a discharge UOTHC, in pay grade E-1, under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 14, for misconduct, frequent involvement in...