Search Decisions

Decision Text

ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002072943C070403
Original file (2002072943C070403.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied
MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION


         IN THE CASE OF:
        

         BOARD DATE: 14 January 2003
         DOCKET NUMBER: AR2002072943

         I certify that hereinafter is recorded the record of consideration of the Army Board for Correction of Military Records in the case of the above-named individual.

Mr. Carl W. S. Chun Director
Mr. G. E. Vandenberg Analyst


The following members, a quorum, were present:

Ms. Margaret K. Patterson Chairperson
Ms. Jennifer L. Prater Member
Ms. Mae M. Bullock Member

         The Board, established pursuant to authority contained in 10 U.S.C. 1552, convened at the call of the Chairperson on the above date. In accordance with Army Regulation 15-185, the application and the available military records pertinent to the corrective action requested were reviewed to determine whether to authorize a formal hearing, recommend that the records be corrected without a formal hearing, or to deny the application without a formal hearing if it is determined that insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate the existence of probable material error or injustice.

         The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein.

         The Board considered the following evidence:

         Exhibit A - Application for correction of military records

         Exhibit B - Military Personnel Records (including advisory opinion, if any)

APPLICANT REQUESTS: That his discharge be upgraded.

APPLICANT STATES: That his discharge is unfair but does not elaborate on his application.

COUNSEL CONTENDS: That the applicant maintains that he had family problems that diminished his capacity to serve and that the discharge was too harsh.

EVIDENCE OF RECORD: The applicant's military records show:

The applicant enlisted in the Army Reserve on 21 August 1997 and completed basic combat training and advanced individual training without reported incident. On 5 January 1999, he enlisted in the Regular Army.

The applicant was reported absent without leave from 18 September through 4 October 1999. The applicant received nonjudicial punishment (NJP) under Article 15, Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) for this period of AWOL.

The applicant again went AWOL on 19 October 1999 and remained absent until 4 January 2000.

On 11 January 2000, court-martial charges were preferred for 77 days AWOL.

After consulting with counsel and being advised of his rights and options, the applicant submitted a formal request for discharge for the good of the service in lieu of court-martial under the provisions of Army Regulations 635-200, chapter 10. He acknowledged that he was guilty of the charge or lesser-included charge. He also acknowledged that had been advised of and understood his rights under the UCMJ, that he could receive a discharge under other than honorable conditions (UOTHC) which would deprive him of many or all of his benefits as a veteran, that he could expect to experience substantial prejudice in civilian life if he received a UOTHC discharge, and that there is no automatic upgrading or review of a less than honorable discharge.

The discharge authorities approved the request for discharge under Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 10 and directed that the applicant be reduced to the lowest enlisted grade (E-1) and receive an under other than honorable conditions discharge.

The applicant was discharged on 27 March 2000 with an under other than honorable conditions discharge. He had 3 years, 4 months, and 3 days of creditable service with 94 days lost due to AWOL.

On 18 February 2002, the Army Discharge Review Board (ADRB) denied the applicant's request to upgrade his discharge.

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. An under other than honorable conditions discharge is normally considered appropriate.

The Manual for Courts-Martial, Table of Maximum Punishments, sets forth the maximum punishments for offenses chargeable under the UCMJ. A punitive discharge is authorized for offenses under Article 86, for periods of AWOL in excess of 30 days.

DISCUSSION : Considering all the evidence, allegations, and information presented by the applicant, together with the evidence of record, and applicable law and regulations, it is concluded:

1. There is no documentation to show that his discharge was unduly harsh, in fact the applicant could have faced a significantly harsher discharge had his request for discharge in lieu of court-martial not been accepted.

2. 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. His service is appropriately characterized by his overall record.

3. 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.

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

__MKP___ __JLP___ __MMB DENY APPLICATION



         Carl W. S. Chun
         Director, Army Board for Correction
         of Military Records


INDEX

CASE ID AR2002072943
SUFFIX
RECON
DATE BOARDED 20030114
TYPE OF DISCHARGE
DATE OF DISCHARGE
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY
DISCHARGE REASON
BOARD DECISION DENY
REVIEW AUTHORITY
ISSUES 1. 144.9307
2. 144.9405
3.
4.
5.
6.


Similar Decisions

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2006 | AR20060009447

    Original file (AR20060009447.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    c. Response to Issues, Recommendation and Rationale: After a careful review of all the applicant’s military records, for the period of enlistment under review, the issue and documents he submitted, the analyst found a mitigating factor that would merit an upgrade of the applicant's discharge to general, under honorable conductions. Board Discussion, Determination, and Recommendation After carefully examining the applicant’s record of service during the period of enlistment under review and...

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2013 | AR20130014355

    Original file (AR20130014355.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Discharge Received: Under Other Than Honorable Conditions c. Date of Discharge: 7 September 2001 d. Reason/Authority/SPD/RE Code: In Lieu of Trial by Court-Martial/AR-635-200 Chapter 10/KFS/RE-4 e. Unit of assignment: 66th Military Police Company, 504th Military Police Battalion, Fort Lewis, WA f. Current Enlistment Date/Term: 1 July 1999, 5 years g. Current Enlistment Service: 2 years, 25 days h. Total Service: 2 years, 25 days i. On 7 August 2001, the separation authority approved the...

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2008 | AR20080013366

    Original file (AR20080013366.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant Name: ????? On 23 September 1999, the applicant consulted with legal counsel and voluntarily requested, in writing, discharge under the provisions of Chapter 10, AR 635-200 in lieu of trial by court-martial. On 14 December 1999, the separation authority approved the Chapter 10 request with an under other than honorable conditions discharge.

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2008 | AR20080017199

    Original file (AR20080017199.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 29 May 2000, the separation authority approved the discharge with a characterization of service of under other than honorable conditions. 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 submit a request for a discharge for the good of the service in lieu of trial by court-martial. It is also noted that the characterization of service for this type of...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2007 | 20070010013

    Original file (20070010013.TXT) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 29 November 2007 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20070010013 I certify that hereinafter is recorded the true and complete record of the proceedings of the Army Board for Correction of Military Records in the case of the above-named individual. In his request for discharge, the applicant indicated that 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...

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2004 | AR2004106149

    Original file (AR2004106149.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    On 17 May 2001, the applicant was discharged. The Board determined that the reason for discharge was proper and equitable and voted not to change it. SECTION B - CERTIFICATION Approval Authority: ROBERT L. HOUSE Colonel, U.S. Army President, Army Discharge Review Board Official: MARY E. SHAW Lieutenant Colonel, U.S. Army Chief, Secretary Recorder EXHIBITS: A - Application for review of discharge C - Other B - Material submitted by applicant INDEX RECORD: AR Number: 2004106149 INDEX...

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2008 | AR20080011548

    Original file (AR20080011548.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant Name: ????? 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 submit a request for a discharge for the good of the service in lieu of trial by court-martial. Therefore, the analyst determined the reason for discharge and the characterization of service were both proper and equitable and recommends to the Board to deny relief.

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2006 | 20060010504

    Original file (20060010504.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE: 1. The applicant requests that his under other than honorable conditions (UOTHC) discharge be upgraded to a general or honorable discharge. On 23 August 2000, the applicant was discharged 24 June 1982 under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 10 in lieu of trial by court-martial with a UOTHC discharge.

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100026860

    Original file (20100026860.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE: 1. The applicant requests that his discharge under other than honorable conditions be upgraded to an honorable discharge. He submitted a request for discharge after being notified that charges were pending against him for being AWOL.

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2013 | 20130014881

    Original file (20130014881.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    A general discharge is a separation from the Army under honorable conditions. There is no record of him returning to Tripler AMC for additional treatment after his release. However, there is no evidence that he was suffering from these conditions at the time he was AWOL or when he requested a discharge in lieu of trial by court-martial.