| Mr. Carl W. S. Chun | Director | |
| Mr. William Blakely | Analyst |
| Mr. Samuel A. Crumpler | Chairperson | ||
| Mr. Roger W. Able | Member | ||
| Mr. Hubert O. Fry, Jr. | Member |
APPLICANT REQUESTS: In effect, that his under other than honorable conditions (UOTHC) discharge be upgraded to a general, under honorable conditions discharge (GD).
APPLICANT STATES: In effect, that his pregnant girlfriend could not adjust to military life and she threatened to go home. He states that he went absent without leave (AWOL) in order to take her home and that he voluntarily turned himself in at Fort Sill, Oklahoma and returned to military control in order to serve his country.
EVIDENCE OF RECORD: The applicant's military records show:
He served in the United States Army Reserve (USAR) and Army National Guard from 26 January 1979 through 1 December 1980, which included 3 months and 22 days of active duty for training. On 4 December 1980, he enlisted in the Regular Army for 4 years and entered active duty at Fort Campbell, Kentucky.
The applicant’s record shows that the highest rank he attained was private (E-2) and it documents no acts of valor, significant achievement, or service warranting special recognition. However, it does reveal an AWOL related disciplinary history.
On 4 February 1981, just two months after his arrival at Fort Campbell, Kentucky, the applicant departed AWOL. He was dropped from the rolls of his organization and remained away for 63 days until returning to military control at Fort Sill, Oklahoma, on 7 April 1981.
On 13 April 1981, the applicant was notified that a court-martial charge had been preferred against him for being AWOL. On 15 April 1981, he consulted with legal counsel, and after being advised of the basis for the contemplated trial by court-martial, the maximum permissible punishment under the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ), and the possible effects of an UOTHC discharge, he voluntarily requested an administrative discharge under the provisions of chapter 10, Army Regulation 635-200, for the good of the service, in lieu of trial by
court-martial.
On 22 April 1981, the appropriate authority approved the applicant’s request for discharge, and he directed that the applicant receive an UOTHC discharge and be reduced to the lowest enlisted grade. On 1 May 1981, the applicant was discharged accordingly after completing a total of 2 months and 24 days of creditable active military service and having accrued a total of 63 days of time lost due to AWOL.
There is no evidence that the applicant applied to the Army Discharge Review Board for an upgrade of his discharge within its 15-year statue of limitations.
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. A discharge UOTHC is normally considered appropriate for members separating under these provisions.
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 Board notes the applicant’s contentions that personal problems caused him to go AWOL and that he voluntarily returned to military control. However, it finds that these factors are not sufficiently mitigating to warrant an upgrade of his discharge.
2. The evidence of record confirms that the applicant was charged with the commission of an offense punishable under the UCMJ with a punitive discharge, and after consulting legal counsel, he voluntarily, and in writing, requested separation from the Army in lieu of trial by court-martial. In doing so, he admitted guilt to the stipulated offense under the UCMJ.
3. The Board is satisfied that all requirements of law and regulation were met and the rights of the applicant were fully protected throughout the separation process and that the applicant’s discharge accurately reflects his overall record of undistinguished service.
4. 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.
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
_ _SAC _ __RWA_ ___HOF__ DENY APPLICATION
| CASE ID | AR2002076255 |
| SUFFIX | |
| RECON | YYYYMMDD |
| DATE BOARDED | 2002/11/26 |
| TYPE OF DISCHARGE | UOTHC |
| DATE OF DISCHARGE | 19810501 |
| DISCHARGE AUTHORITY | AR635-200 |
| DISCHARGE REASON | In Lieu Of Trial By CM |
| BOARD DECISION | DENY |
| REVIEW AUTHORITY | |
| ISSUES 1. | 144.7100 |
| 2. | 144.9307 |
| 3. | |
| 4. | |
| 5. | |
| 6. |
ARMY | BCMR | CY2003 | 2003083573C070212
The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein. He states, “but still could not control it.” In addition, he states, that he was absent without leave (AWOL) for a couple of days and subsequently put out of the military. 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...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2006 | 20060012524
The applicant requests that his discharge under other than honorable conditions be upgraded to a general discharge. The applicant provides page 2 of a DD Form 293 (Application for the Review of Discharge or Dismissal From the Armed Forces of the United States), a letter, dated 13 May 2005, from the Department of Veterans Affairs which erroneously shows that he was honorably discharged on 21 January 1981, his DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge From Active Duty) that was issued...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100026048
THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE: 1. A condition of submitting such a request is that the individual concerned must admit guilt to the charges against him or her or of a lesser-included offense which authorizes the imposition of a bad conduct or dishonorable discharge and he or she must indicate he or she has been briefed and understands the consequences of such a request as well as the discharge he or she might receive. Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 3-7b, provides...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2005 | 20050016052C070206
On 25 July 1978, the separation authority approved the applicant’s request for discharge and directed that he receive an under other than honorable conditions discharge. The discharge proceedings were conducted in accordance with law and regulations applicable at the time and the character of the discharge is commensurate with the applicant's overall record of military service. 9 In order to justify correction of a military record the applicant must show to the satisfaction of the Board,...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2004 | 20040003420C070208
Michael J. Flynn | |Member | The Board considered the following evidence: Exhibit A - Application for correction of military records. On 9 March 1978, the separation authority approved the applicant’s request for discharge and directed that he receive an UOTHC discharge. On 14 April 1978, the applicant was discharged accordingly.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002072119C070403
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. EVIDENCE OF RECORD : The applicant's military records show:
ARMY | BCMR | CY2003 | 2003089505C070403
There is no evidence that the applicant ever applied to the Army Discharge Review Board for review of his discharge under that board's 15-year statute of limitations. The evidence also indicates that the applicant's assigned RE-code of RE-4 was appropriate at the time of separation and that it is still appropriate. 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...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2004 | 20040005139C070208
Powers | |Member | The Board considered the following evidence: Exhibit A - Application for correction of military records. THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE: 1. His request for a chapter 10 discharge, even after appropriate and proper consultation with a military lawyer, tends to show he wished to avoid the court-martial and the punitive discharge that he might have received.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2006 | 20060003083C070205
Thomas Ray | |Member | The Board considered the following evidence: Exhibit A - Application for correction of military records. The applicant requests that his undesirable discharge be upgraded to a general discharge. 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.
ARMY | BCMR | CY1997 | 9709707
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. EVIDENCE OF RECORD : The...