| Mr. Carl W. S. Chun | Director | |
| Mr. G. E. Vandenberg | Analyst |
| Ms. Margaret K. Patterson | Chairperson | |
| Ms. Jennifer L. Prater | Member | |
| Ms. Mae M. Bullock | Member |
APPLICANT REQUESTS: That his discharge be upgraded.
APPLICANT STATES: That he was wrongfully discharged, that he suffered discrimination based on his race and that he has an honorable discharge from the Colorado Army National Guard, and that he did nothing wrong. He also states that he was told that he would get an automatic upgrade.
EVIDENCE OF RECORD: The applicant's military records show:
The applicant enlisted in the Colorado Army National Guard and served on active duty for training from 12 March through 11 June 1976, completing basic combat training and advanced individual training without reported incident. He was ordered to active duty on 14 February 1977.
On 7 April 1977, the applicant received nonjudicial punishment (NJP) under Article 15, Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) for failure to go to his appointed place of duty and for being incapacitated for proper performance of his duties due to prior consumption of liquor.
On 2 May 1977, the applicant again received NJP for failure to go to his appointed place of duty and for failure to follow a direct order.
The applicant's record contains no documentation of the processing of the applicant's request for discharge in lieu of trial by court-martial, except a 3 May 1977 DA Form 268 (Report of Suspension of Favorable Personal Actions) that shows that the service member was being discharged under chapter 10, Army Regulation 635-200.
A letter, dated 29 June 1977, tasked three individuals to act as prisoner escorts for the applicant from the Manheim Confinement Center to the Bamberg Law Center. There is no documentation as to why the applicant was a prisoner.
Although the discharge packet is not of record, the evidence of record shows that the applicant was discharged under the provisions of chapter 10, Army Regulation 635-200, for the good of the service in lieu of trial by court-martial. In connection with such a discharge, the applicant would have to have been charged with the commission of an offense punishable under the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) with a punitive discharge. Procedurally, the applicant was required to consult with defense counsel and to voluntarily, and in writing, request separation from the Army in lieu of trial by court-martial. In doing so, the applicant admitted guilt to the stipulated offenses under the UCMJ.
The applicant was discharged as a Reservist, under Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 10, on 11 July 1977. His characterization of service is listed as under other than honorable conditions. He had 4 months and 28 days of creditable service during this period.
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.
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. In the absence of evidence to the contrary, it is presumed that the discharge proceedings were conducted in accordance with law and regulations applicable at the time. The character of the discharge is commensurate with his overall record.
2. There is no evidence of any type of discrimination to support the applicant's contentions.
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:
| CASE ID | AR2002073614 |
| SUFFIX | |
| RECON | |
| DATE BOARDED | 200301141 |
| TYPE OF DISCHARGE | |
| DATE OF DISCHARGE | |
| DISCHARGE AUTHORITY | |
| DISCHARGE REASON | |
| BOARD DECISION | DENY |
| REVIEW AUTHORITY | |
| ISSUES 1. | 144.00 |
| 2. | |
| 3. | |
| 4. | |
| 5. | |
| 6. |
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002068927C070402
The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein. 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. Carl W. S. Chun Director, Army Board for...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002071160C070402
EVIDENCE OF RECORD : The applicant's military records show: 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 an administrative discharge in lieu of trial by court-martial. DISCUSSION : Considering all the evidence, allegations, and information presented by the applicant, together with the evidence of record, applicable law and...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2004 | 20040008901C070208
On 27 January 1977, the appropriate separation authority approved the applicant’s discharge request and direct his reduction to the lowest enlisted grade and the issuance of an under other than honorable characterization of service. The U.S. Court of Appeals, observing that applicants to the Army Discharge Review Board (ADRB) are by statute allowed 15 years to apply there, and that this Board's exhaustion requirement (Army Regulation 15-185, paragraph 2-8), effectively shortens that filing...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2006 | 20060001225C070205
THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE: 1. He states that his recruiter lied to him about being able to have the government relocate his family with him at his first duty station. A punitive discharge is authorized for offenses under Article 86, for periods of AWOL in excess of 30 days.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2013 | 20130011249
The applicant requests that his under other than honorable conditions (UOTHC) discharge be upgraded to no less than general, under honorable conditions. On 18 November 1977, the separation authority approved the applicants request for discharge and directed that he be issued a DD Form 794A (UOTHC Discharge Certificate). Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations) sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002070787C070402
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 more favorable discharge. The appropriate authority (a major general) approved his request for discharge on 19 August 1977 and directed that he be discharged under other than honorable conditions.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140016288
The applicant requests reconsideration of his earlier request for an upgrade of his under other than honorable conditions discharge. The applicant provides: * DD Form 214 (Report of Separation from Active Duty) * Statement regarding his absence * Letters to his next of kin * DA Form 2-1 (Personnel Qualification Record) * Army Discharge Review Board (ADRB) decision * DA Forms 4187 (Personnel Action) * Multiple post-service certificates and letters CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE: 1. The DD Form...
ARMY | DRB | CY2006 | AR20060013459
Facts, Circumstances, and Legal Basis for Separation a. Legal Basis for Separation: Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel. It is also noted that the characterization of service for this type of discharge is normally under other than honorable conditions and that the applicant was aware of that prior to requesting discharge.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2003 | 2003089610C070403
Accordingly, on 26 September 1974, the applicant was discharged from the Army with an undesirable discharge. He was credited with 1 year, 5 months, and 16 days of active military service and 1, 833 days of lost time. The Board determined that the evidence presented and the merits of this case are insufficient to warrant the relief requested, and therefore, it would not be in the interest of justice to excuse the applicant's failure to timely file this application within the 3-year statute...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002083076C070215
The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein. APPLICANT REQUESTS: That his undesirable discharge be upgraded to honorable. 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...