| Mr. Carl W. S. Chun | Director | |
| Mr. Jessie B. Strickland | Analyst |
| Mr. Walter T. Morrison | Chairperson | |
| Ms. Linda D. Simmons | Member | |
| Mr. Frank C. Jones II | Member |
APPLICANT REQUESTS: That his discharge under other than honorable conditions be upgraded to honorable.
APPLICANT STATES: In effect, that at the time he went absent without leave (AWOL) there was a lot of racial tension where he was stationed and soldiers began fighting each other. He goes on to state that he was a young stupid kid of eighteen who was afraid at the time and was unaware that he had a personality disorder. He further states that he did not realize the consequences of such a discharge at the time and that he does now and does not want to die ashamed of his discharge. He continues by stating that he has four relatives who were either honorably discharged or retired from the military and he desires to have his discharge be honorable as well. In support of his application he submits documents from the Social Security Administration indicating that he is receiving disability compensation from that agency and four character references.
EVIDENCE OF RECORD: The applicant's military records show:
He enlisted with parental consent on 14 August 1979 for a period of 3 years, training as an indirect fire infantryman and assignment to Fort Campbell, Kentucky (101st Airborne). He successfully completed his training and was transferred to Fort Campbell on 17 November 1979, for duty as an ammo bearer.
On 12 February 1980, nonjudicial punishment (NJP) was imposed against him for being incapacitated to perform his duties due to his over-indulgence of intoxicating liquor and for failure to go to his place of duty. His punishment consisted of a forfeiture of pay.
On 17 June 1980, NJP was imposed against him for being disrespectful in deportment towards a superior noncommissioned officer, for disobeying a lawful order from a superior noncommissioned officer and for communicating a threat to injure a superior noncommissioned officer. His punishment consisted of a forfeiture of pay, extra duty and restriction.
On 17 July 1980, NJP was imposed against him for altering his birth date on his identification card and for being out of uniform. His punishment consisted of a reduction to the pay grade of E-1 (suspended for 60 days), a forfeiture of pay, extra duty and restriction.
On 24 September 1980, he went AWOL and remained absent until he was apprehended by civil authorities on 17 November 1980 and was returned to Fort Campbell, where charges were preferred against him for the AWOL offense.
The facts and circumstances surrounding the applicant’s discharge are not present in the available records. However, his records do contain a duly constituted report of separation (DD Form 214) signed by the applicant, which shows that he was discharged under other than honorable conditions at Fort Campbell on 12 December 1980, under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 10, in lieu of trial by court-martial. He had served 1 year, 2 months and 6 days of total active service and had 53 days of lost time due to AWOL.
There is no evidence in the available records to show that he ever applied to the ADRB for an upgrade of his discharge.
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. In the absence of evidence to the contrary, it must be presumed that 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 the length of his absences during a short period of time.
4. The applicant’s contentions and supporting documents have been considered by the Board. However, they are not sufficiently mitigating to warrant relief when compared to his overall record of undistinguished service.
5. 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.
6. 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
___fcj___ ___lds __ __wtm___ DENY APPLICATION
| CASE ID | AR2002078134 |
| SUFFIX | |
| RECON | YYYYMMDD |
| DATE BOARDED | 2003/03/06 |
| TYPE OF DISCHARGE | UOTHC |
| DATE OF DISCHARGE | 1980/12/12 |
| 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 | CY2006 | 20060001775C070205
Counsel requests, in effect, that the Board consider the applicant’s request based on the available evidence of record. However, his records do contain a duly constituted report of separation (DD Form 214), signed by the applicant, which shows that he was discharged at Fort Campbell on 16 July 1969, under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 10, in lieu of trial by court-martial. On 17 June 1974 and 12 August 1977, the Army Discharge Review Board denied the applicant's...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002080134C070215
The record contains no evidence that he was ever punished for this offense. On 28 January 1987, the Army Discharge Review Board denied the applicant’s request for clemency The available records contains no medical evidence and the applicant has provided no evidence that demonstrates he suffers from an illness or an injury that was either incurred in, or aggravated as a result of his military service.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002078436C070215
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. Accordingly, he was discharged under other than honorable conditions on 1 October 1982, under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 10, in lieu of trial by court-martial.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2005 | 20050001211C070206
Accordingly, he was discharged under other than honorable conditions on 25 January 1980, under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 10, in lieu of trial by court-martial. There is no evidence in the available records to show that he 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...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2005 | 20050001211C070206
Accordingly, he was discharged under other than honorable conditions on 25 January 1980, under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 10, in lieu of trial by court-martial. There is no evidence in the available records to show that he 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...
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 | CY2005 | AR20050016051C070206
The applicant requests that his undesirable discharge be upgraded to honorable. On 26 August 1971, NJP was imposed against the applicant for disobeying a lawful order from a superior commissioned officer to perform his extra duty. 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 | CY2011 | 20110018198
IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 12 April 2012 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20110018198 THE BOARD CONSIDERED THE FOLLOWING EVIDENCE: 1. However, his unit commander stated: * he was pending trial for an offense punishable by a bad conduct or a dishonorable discharge * the administrative burdens involved in the court-martial and possible confinement are not considered warranted in view of the nature of the offense * he recommended approval of the applicant's request for discharge and that an under other than...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080016874
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 imposition of a bad conduct discharge or a discharge under other honorable conditions. The DD Form 214 he was issued at the time of his discharge shows he was discharged for the good of the service with a character of service of under other than honorable conditions. Although an...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100008118
The applicant requests that his discharge under other than honorable conditions be upgraded to a fully honorable discharge. The appropriate authority (a major general) approved his request on 22 December 1987 and directed that he be discharged under other than honorable conditions. He was 26 years of age at the time of his discharge.