| Mr. Carl W. S. Chun | Director | |
| Mr. Jessie B. Strickland | Analyst |
| Mr. Fred N. Eichorn | Chairperson | |
| Mr. Ted S. Kanamine | Member | |
| Ms. Lana E. McGlynn | Member |
APPLICANT REQUESTS: That his discharge under other than honorable conditions be upgraded to a more favorable discharge.
APPLICANT STATES: That at the time, he was young, dumb and stupid, because he fell in love with a German girl or thought he had and went absent without leave (AWOL).
EVIDENCE OF RECORD: The applicant's military records show:
He was born on 31 January 1953 and initially served in the Marine Corps from April 1972 until he was honorably discharged in April 1974. He served in the Marine Corps Reserve until he was honorably discharged on 12 April 1977.
He enlisted in the Regular Army on 13 April 1977, for a period of 4 years, training as a materiel supplyman and assignment to Europe. He successfully completed his training and was transferred to Germany on 17 August 1977.
On 7 September 1977, nonjudicial punishment (NJP) was imposed against him for assaulting a noncommissioned officer. His punishment consisted of a forfeiture of pay, extra duty and correctional custody for 7 days (suspended for 30 days). The applicant did not appeal the punishment.
On 1 December 1977, nonjudicial punishment was imposed against him for two specifications of failing to go to his place of duty. His punishment consisted of a reduction to the pay grade of E-1, a forfeiture of pay and correctional custody for 30 days. He appealed his punishment and his appeal was denied on 20 December 1977.
On 22 December 1977, while en route to correctional custody, the applicant escaped from the custody of a noncommissioned officer. He went AWOL from 22 December 1977 and remained absent until he was returned to military control on 4 January 1978 and charges were preferred against him on 2 February 1978.
On 6 February 1978, 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 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 and elected not to submit a statement in his own behalf.
On 2 March 1978, his counsel submitted a request in the applicant’s behalf, requesting that his request for discharge be withdrawn. The commanding general disapproved his request on 20 March 1978 and directed that he be discharged under other than honorable conditions.
Accordingly, he was discharged under other than honorable conditions on 28 March 1978, under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 10, in lieu of trial by court-martial. He had served 11 months and 16 days of active service during his current enlistment and had 13 days of lost time due to AWOL.
There is no indication 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 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 voluntary 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 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 was at that time and is still 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 court-martial, 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. 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 undistinguished record of service during such a short period of time.
4. The applicant’s contentions have been noted by the Board; however, they are not sufficiently mitigating to warrant an upgrade of his discharge when compared to his overall record of service during the time in question.
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
___lem __ ___tsk __ __fe ____ DENY APPLICATION
| CASE ID | AR2002072607 |
| SUFFIX | |
| RECON | YYYYMMDD |
| DATE BOARDED | 2002/08/13 |
| TYPE OF DISCHARGE | UOTHC |
| DATE OF DISCHARGE | 1978/03/28 |
| 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 | CY2009 | 20090005345
In his request for discharge, the applicant acknowledged 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 than honorable conditions. The DD Form 214 he was issued at the time shows he was discharged for the good of the service in lieu of a court-martial with a character of service of under other than honorable conditions. ...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2005 | 20050008698C070206
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 included offense which authorizes the imposition of a bad conduct or dishonorable discharge and they must indicate that they have been briefed and understand...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100020675
The applicant requests an upgrade of his discharge under other than honorable conditions (UOTHC) to an honorable discharge (HD) or discharge for medical reasons. The version of the regulation in effect at the time provided that an individual requesting discharge under chapter 10 would undergo a medical examination as prescribed in Army Regulation 40-501 (Standards of Medical Fitness), chapter 10. c. Paragraph 3-7a provides that an HD is a separation with honor and entitles the recipient to...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2003 | 2003085402C070212
The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein. He enlisted in Knoxville, Tennessee, on 3 January 1977, for a period of 3 years and training as a material supplyman. 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...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090012393
There is no evidence of record which shows the applicant was diagnosed with depression or any mental condition prior to his discharge. However, there is no evidence of record and the applicant did not provide any evidence which shows he was diagnosed with any mental condition prior to discharge. Evidence of record shows the applicant completed 4 months and 28 days of creditable active service prior to his enlistment in the Regular Army on 23 February 1977.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2005 | 20050004715C070206
The application submitted in this case is dated 18 March 2005. His DD Form 214 issued at the time of his discharge shows he had time lost during the periods of 15 November to 7 December 1977. Richard T. Dunbar ______________________ CHAIRPERSON INDEX |CASE ID |AR20050004715 | |SUFFIX | | |RECON | | |DATE BOARDED |20051208 | |TYPE OF DISCHARGE | | |DATE OF DISCHARGE | | |DISCHARGE AUTHORITY | | |DISCHARGE REASON | | |BOARD DECISION |(DENY) | |REVIEW AUTHORITY | | |ISSUES |267/rem lost time...
ARMY | BCMR | CY1996 | 9606862C070209
On 8 September 1978, the applicant was discharged, in pay grade E-1, under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 10, for the good of service with a discharge UOTHC. On 3 June 1980, the Army Discharge Review Board denied the applicants request for an upgrade of his discharge. The U.S. Court of Appeals, observing that applicants to the Discharge Review Board (ADRB) are by statute allowed 15 years to apply there, and that this Board's exhaustion requirement (AR 15-185, paragraph...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002072376C070403
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 a general discharge. He enlisted at age 17 on 4 November 1975, for a period of 3 years, training as an infantry indirect fire crewman and assignment to Fort Carson.
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 | CY2001 | 2001056351C070420
The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein. PURPOSE : To determine whether the application was submitted within the time limit established by law, and if not, whether it is in the interest of justice to excuse the failure to timely file. The applicant has not presented and the records do not contain sufficient justification to conclude that it would be in the interest of justice to grant the relief requested or to...