| Mr. Carl W. S. Chun | Director | |
| Ms. Rosa M. Chandler | Analyst |
| Mr. John N. Slone | Chairperson | |
| Mr. Thomas D. Howard, Jr. | Member | |
| Mr. Thomas Lanyi | Member |
APPLICANT REQUESTS: That his under other than honorable conditions (UOTHC) discharge be upgraded to a general discharge (GD) under honorable conditions.
APPLICANT STATES: In effect, that he was harassed; that he was never given a fair hearing; and that he received nonjudicial punishment (NJP) after he returned to his unit 1 hour late because a snow storm caused transportation delays. The second time he returned to his unit late, he received a court-martial. He also states that he spent 5 years in the Army and that he was a good worker with a clean record. It was not until the very end that he started having problems.
EVIDENCE OF RECORD: The applicant's military records show:
He enlisted in the Regular Army for 3 years on 31 August 1972. On 20 December 1972, following completion of all required military training, he was awarded military occupational specialty (MOS) 11B, Light Weapons Infantryman.
On 15 January 1973, the applicant was assigned to Germany.
The applicant left his unit in an absent without leave (AWOL) status from 28 July-3 October 1973 when he returned to military control at Fort Leonard Wood, Missouri.
On 16 October 1973, the applicant accepted NJP under the provisions of Article 15, Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ), for the above period of AWOL. His punishment included reduction from pay grade E-3 to pay grade E-1 (suspended for 60 days), forfeiture of $75.00 pay per month for 2 months, and 30 days of restriction.
On an unknown date, the applicant was assigned to Fort Campbell, Kentucky. On 22 July 1974, he accepted NJP for being AWOL from his unit from 14 July-15 July 1974. On 27 August 1974, he accepted NJP for being disrespectful in language towards a noncommissioned officer on 5 August 1974. Both punishments included extra duty and restriction.
The applicant was AWOL from his unit from 9-10 December 1974. On 23 January 1975, he was convicted by a special court-martial of this period of AWOL. His sentence included the forfeiture of $75.00 pay per month for 1 month.
On 18 March 1975, the applicant accepted NJP for disobeying lawful orders given by a noncommissioned officer on 12 and 13 March 1975. His punishment included 7 days of extra duty and restriction.
The applicant left his unit in an AWOL status from 20 June 1975-14 February 1977. On 4 Mach 1977, court-martial charges were preferred against him for this period of AWOL.
On 7 March 1977, the applicant consulted with legal counsel and requested discharge under the provisions of chapter 10, Army Regulation (AR) 635-200 for the good of the service in lieu of court-martial. He was advised that he could receive a UOTHC discharge. He authenticated a statement with his signature acknowledging that he understood the ramifications and effects of receiving a UOTHC discharge. He indicated in a statement submitted in his own behalf that he was drafted, so he enlisted because he had no choice. He went AWOL because he had family problems and his commander did not believe him when he tried to explain. He also indicated that he believed his family problems could be resolved if his request for separation was approved.
On 8 March 1977, the applicant's commander recommended approval. On 14 March 1977, the approval authority approved the applicant's request for discharge under the provisions of chapter 10 and directed that he be separated with a UOTHC discharge in pay grade E-1.
The applicant's DD Form 214 (Report of Separation from Active Duty) shows that he was separated on 28 March 1977 under the provisions of chapter 10, AR 635-200 with a UOTHC discharge for conduct triable by a court-martial. He had completed 2 years, 8 months and 24 days of active military service and he had 510 days of lost time due to being AWOL, 167 days were lost subsequent to his normal expiration of term of service date.
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.
AR 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 submit a request for discharge for the good of the service in lieu of trial by court-martial. The request may be submitted at any time after charges have been preferred and must include the individual’s admission of guilt. Although an honorable or general discharge was authorized, a UOTHC discharge was 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 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.
2. The applicant's voluntary request for separation under the provisions of AR 635-200, chapter 10, to avoid trial by court-martial was administratively correct and in conformance with applicable regulations.
3. The Board found no evidence of arbitrary or capricious actions by the applicant's chain of command. The applicant had an extensive period of AWOL just 5 months after he was inducted into the Army and he was continuously AWOL after this incident. His conduct was inconsistent with the Army’s standards for acceptable personal conduct and his overall quality of service does not warrant an upgrade of his discharge.
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
__jns___ __tdh___ __tl____ DENY APPLICATION
| CASE ID | AR2002081847 |
| SUFFIX | |
| RECON | |
| DATE BOARDED | 20030722 |
| TYPE OF DISCHARGE | (UOTHC) |
| DATE OF DISCHARGE | 19770328 |
| DISCHARGE AUTHORITY | AR635-200, Chap 10 |
| DISCHARGE REASON | A71.00 |
| BOARD DECISION | (DENY) |
| REVIEW AUTHORITY | |
| ISSUES 1. | 144.7100 |
| 2. | |
| 3. | |
| 4. | |
| 5. | |
| 6. |
ARMY | BCMR | CY2001 | 2001064142C070421
The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein. On 29 April 1977, after consulting with counsel about his rights, the applicant requested discharge under the provisions of chapter 10, Army Regulation (AR) 635-200, for the good of the service in lieu of trial by court-martial. Accordingly, on 20 May 1977, the applicant was discharged from the Army after completing 1 year, 10 months, and 3 days of creditable military...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2007 | 20070006916C071029
On 3 May 1974, the applicant accepted NJP for breaking restriction. The separations regulation states that an under other than honorable conditions (UOTHC) discharge normally is appropriate for a Soldier who is discharged in lieu of trial by court-martial. _____Hubert O. Fry______ CHAIRPERSON INDEX |CASE ID |AR20070006916 | |SUFFIX | | |RECON | | |DATE BOARDED |2007/10/23 | |TYPE OF DISCHARGE |UD | |DATE OF DISCHARGE |1975/11/20 | |DISCHARGE AUTHORITY |AR 635-200 C10 | |DISCHARGE REASON...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2006 | 20060015479C071029
On 28 October 1977, the appropriate authority approved the applicant’s request and directed the applicant be furnished an Under Other than Honorable Conditions Discharge Certificate. Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel. Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 3-7b, provides that a general discharge is a separation from the Army under honorable conditions.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2003 | 2003084007C070212
The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein. On 16 September 1975, the applicant was discharged, with a general discharge under honorable conditions, in pay grade E-2, under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 5, the EDP. 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:
ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | 20110004051
On 6 April 1982, the Army Discharge Review Board denied the applicant's request for an upgrade of his discharge 15. The evidence of record shows the applicant received five Article 15s and two court-martial convictions during the period of service under review. Conviction and discharge were effected in accordance with the applicable law and regulations, and the discharge appropriately characterizes the misconduct for which the applicant was convicted.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002068651C070402
He was involuntarily ordered to active duty from the Army National Guard of the United States on 14 August 1975 for a period of 19 months and 12 days. On 7 October 1981, the Army Discharge Review Board (ADRB) denied the applicant's request for an upgrade of his discharge. Army policy states that although an honorable or general discharge is authorized, a UOTHC discharge is normally considered appropriate.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2003 | 2003085936C070212
On 20 June 1978, the appropriate authority approved the applicant’s request for discharge with a UOTHC discharge. Accordingly, on 29 June 1978, the applicant was discharged from the Army after completing 2 years, 11 months, and 23 days of creditable military service and accruing 381 days of lost time due to AWOL. The applicant has failed to submit evidence that would satisfy this requirement.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2004 | 20040008504C070208
On 17 January 1975, the separation authority approved the applicant’s request to withdraw his discharge request. On 24 April 1975, the separation authority approved the applicant’s request for discharge and directed that he receive an UD discharge. 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...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2015 | 20150003911
The applicant requests correction of his military records by upgrading his under other than honorable conditions (UOTHC) discharge to a fully honorable characterization of service. The applicant through counsel contends that his military records should be corrected by upgrading his UOTHC discharge to a fully honorable characterization of service because he was discharged after being incarcerated on false charges while on leave. The applicant's assertion that his characterization of service...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2003 | 2003085117C070212
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. On 31 August 1989, the Army Discharge Review Board denied the applicant’s request for an upgrade of his discharge. The evidence of record clearly shows that he had NJP imposed against him twice, he was counseled at least twice and he was frequently involved with civil authorities as a result of his acts of misconduct.