| Mr. Carl W. S. Chun | Director | |
| Ms. Joyce A. Wright | Analyst |
| Ms. Margaret K. Patterson | Chairperson | |
| Ms. Mae M. Bullock | Member | |
| Ms. Jennifer L. Prater | Member |
APPLICANT REQUESTS: That his discharge characterized as under other than honorable conditions (UOTHC) be upgraded to honorable.APPLICANT STATES: That he was having family problems and went AWOL trying to resolve them. His spouse was pregnant and they were having financial problems. His mother was in Texas and ill and he was the only child and felt that it was his duty to be with her. He did not have enough funds to support his family and needed to depart the Army to take care of them.
EVIDENCE OF RECORD: The applicant’s military records show he enlisted on 1 April 1980, as a Pershing Missile Crewman. The applicant failed to complete training and was AWOL effective 20 July 1980.
Charges were preferred against the applicant on 9 September 1980, for being AWOL from 20 July to 27 August 1980 (38 days).
On 9 September 1980, he consulted with counsel and voluntarily requested discharge for the good of the service in lieu of trial by court-martial, under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 10. In doing so, he acknowledged guilt of the offense charged and acknowledged that he might encounter substantial prejudice in civilian life and might be ineligible for many or all benefits administered by the Veterans Administration (VA) if a discharge under other than honorable conditions were issued. He also elected not to submit a statement in his own behalf.
On 25 September 1980, the separation authority approved the applicant’s request for discharge and directed that he be furnished an Under Other Than Honorable Conditions Discharge. The applicant was discharged on 6 October
1980.
The applicant applied to the Army Discharge Review Board (ADRB) for an upgrade of his discharge on 24 September 2001. However, the ADRB was precluded from accepting his application due to its statute of limitations. This Board accepted his application (DD Form 149), dated 28 May 2002.
Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for 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. 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. 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. The type of discharge directed and the reasons for that separation were appropriate considering all of the facts of the case.
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
__mp____ __mb___ __jp____ DENY APPLICATION
| CASE ID | AR2002074890 |
| SUFFIX | |
| RECON | |
| DATE BOARDED | 20030114 |
| TYPE OF DISCHARGE | UOTHC |
| DATE OF DISCHARGE | 19801006 |
| DISCHARGE AUTHORITY | AR 635-200 |
| DISCHARGE REASON | |
| BOARD DECISION | DENY |
| REVIEW AUTHORITY | |
| ISSUES 1. | 360/191 |
| 2. | |
| 3. | |
| 4. | |
| 5. | |
| 6. |
ARMY | BCMR | CY2006 | 20060004036C070205
THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE: 1. He had completed 6 years, 2 months, and 8 days of active military service during the period under review. On 10 September 1982, the Army Discharge Review Board (ADRB), by unanimous vote, denied the applicant’s request for an upgrade of his discharge.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2003 | 2003084881C070212
The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein. APPLICANT STATES : That he believes the circumstances involved in his discharge warranted a better discharge. EVIDENCE OF RECORD : The applicant's military records show:
ARMY | BCMR | CY2001 | 2001053868C070420
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. 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:
ARMY | BCMR | CY2007 | 20070007611
THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE: 1. The applicant requests, in effect, that his discharge, characterized as under other than honorable conditions (UOTHC), be upgraded. On 30 December 1980, the separation authority approved the applicant's request for discharge and directed that he be furnished a discharge characterized as UOTHC and that he be reduced to the lowest enlisted grade.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2003 | 2003088854C070403
On 16 October 1980, the separation authority approved the request and directed that the applicant be separated with a UOTHC discharge. On 24 March 1983, the Army Discharge Review Board (ADRB) denied the applicant’s request for an upgrade of his discharge. 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...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002070796C070402
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 honorable. EVIDENCE OF RECORD : The applicant's military records show:
ARMY | BCMR | CY2001 | 2001056343C070420
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: Carl W. S. Chun Director, Army Board for Correction of Military RecordsINDEXCASE IDAR2001056343SUFFIXRECONDATE BOARDED20010830TYPE OF DISCHARGE(UOTHC)DATE OF DISCHARGE19820311DISCHARGE AUTHORITYAR635-200, CHAPTER 10 DISCHARGE REASONA70.00BOARD DECISION(DENY)REVIEW AUTHORITYISSUES 1.144.70002.3.4.5.6.
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 | 2002068671C070402
The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein. On 20 October 1980, the separation authority directed that the applicant be reduced to pay grade E-1 and separated with a UOTHC discharge. The applicant expressed that he was experiencing personal problems after he returned from being AWOL, however, there is no evidence that he sought assistance through his chain of command prior to going AWOL.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100016360
The applicant requests his under other than honorable conditions (UOTHC) discharge be upgraded to a general discharge (GD). The applicant's records contain a record of nonjudicial punishment (NJP) under Article 15, Uniform Code of Military Justice, for being AWOL from 2 September 1980 to 8 January 1981, for which he received a forfeiture of $250 pay for 2 months, and 14 days of extra duty. The applicant requests a discharge upgrade and states, in effect, he had to go AWOL to keep his son...