| Mr. Carl W. S. Chun | Director | |
| Ms. Deyon D. Battle | Analyst |
| Mr. Roger W. Able | Chairperson | ||
| Mr. Larry C. Bergquist | Member | ||
| Ms. Barbara J. Ellis | Member |
APPLICANT REQUESTS: That his discharge under other than honorable conditions be upgraded to an honorable discharge.
APPLICANT STATES: That he made the worst decision of his life when he was discharged and that he has lived in regret and shame ever since that time. He states that he believes that he has suffered enough for the mistake that he made and that a woman, his future wife and the mother of his children was involved in the incident that lead to his discharge. He concludes by stating that up to the point of the offense for which he was discharged, his service was exemplary and distinguished.
EVIDENCE OF RECORD: The applicant's military records show:
On 7 June 1977, he enlisted in the Army at age 23, for 4 years, in the pay grade of E-1. He successfully completed his training as a cannon crewman.
The applicant went absent without leave (AWOL) on 21 October 1978 and he remained absent until he was apprehended by civil authorities and returned to military control on 16 March 1979. The notice of unauthorized absence indicates that prior to going AWOL, the applicant had an alcohol problem related directly to peer pressure and that he volunteered for self help through the drug and alcohol abuse program and was making outstanding progress.
On 27 March 1979, the applicant was notified that charges were pending against him for being AWOL and after consulting with counsel, he submitted a request for discharge under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 10, for the good of the service, in lieu of trial by court-martial. At the time that he submitted his request he submitted a statement in his own behalf indicating that he could not cope with the Army and that his inability to cope caused him to begin drinking. He stated that he was placed in the alcohol and drug program for approximately 6 months and that he believed that he failed a urinalysis test because he just could not cope with military life. He stated that while he was AWOL he had no drinking problem and under the circumstances he desired to be discharged from the Army. He concluded his statement by explaining that he could not deal with being separated from his parents, family and friends for long periods of time and that when he went AWOL he met a girl who he hoped to marry and that he could not bear to leave her.
The appropriate authority approved the request for discharge on 9 April 1979. Accordingly, on 24 April 1979, the applicant was discharged under other than honorable conditions, under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 10, for the good of the service, in lieu of trial by court-martial. He had completed 1 year, 5 months and 23 days of total active service and he had approximately 146 days of lost time due to AWOL.
There is no evidence of record that shows that the applicant ever applied to the Army Discharge Review Board for an upgrade of his discharge within that board’s 15-year statute 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 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 is authorized, 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 administrative separation was accomplished in compliance with applicable regulations with no indication of procedural errors, which would tend to jeopardize his rights.
2. The type of discharge directed and the reasons therefore were appropriate considering all the facts of the case.
3. The Board has noted the applicant’s contentions. However, he chose to request an administrative discharge rather than risk the consequences of a
court-martial. Although he may now believe that he made the wrong choice, he should not be allowed to change his mind at this late date.
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
__lb ____ ___be___ ___ra ___ DENY APPLICATION
| CASE ID | AR2003084518 |
| SUFFIX | |
| RECON | |
| DATE BOARDED | 2003/07/10 |
| TYPE OF DISCHARGE | UOTHC |
| DATE OF DISCHARGE | 19790424 |
| DISCHARGE AUTHORITY | AR 635-200 |
| DISCHARGE REASON | CHAPTER 10 |
| BOARD DECISION | DENY |
| REVIEW AUTHORITY | |
| ISSUES 1. 689 | 144.7000 |
| 2. 708 | 144.7100 |
| 3. | |
| 4. | |
| 5. | |
| 6. |
ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | 20110020458
The applicant states: a. On 18 June 1981, the applicant was discharged accordingly. There is no evidence the applicant applied to the Army Discharge Review Board for an upgrade of his discharge within its 15-year statute of limitations.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2001 | 2001060747C070421
The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein. Army Regulation 635-200 states in pertinent part that an honorable discharge is a separation with honor. It is issued to a soldier whose military record is satisfactory but not sufficiently meritorious to warrant an honorable discharge.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2013 | 20130007839
THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE: 1. The applicant states he went absent without leave (AWOL) as a result of trying to relocate to be with his wife as the military could not accomplish that. Further, the record of evidence shows he acknowledged he was being considered for a UOTHC discharge.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140001289
These thoughts and events kept him leaving the Army AWOL. Although an honorable or general discharge was authorized, a discharge under other than honorable conditions was normally issued to an individual who was discharged for the good of the service. c. A general discharge was a separation from the Army under honorable conditions.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2004 | 2004100521C070208
The Board considered the following evidence: Exhibit A - Application for correction of military records. Accordingly, the applicant was discharged under other than honorable conditions on 2 October 1979 under the provisions of Army Regulation 635- 200, chapter 10, for the good of the service. The applicant’s record of service included one nonjudicial punishment and 276 days of lost time.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080007878
THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE: 1. Charges were preferred against the applicant on 30 May 1984 for being AWOL from 9 April 1981 to 19 May 1984. 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 consequences of such a request as...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140006920
The applicant's request for discharge states he was not subjected to coercion with respect to his request for discharge. The applicant's DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) shows he was discharged on 16 June 1980 under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations - Enlisted Personnel), chapter 10, for the good of the service in lieu of trial by court-martial, with an under other than honorable conditions characterization of service. There...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2013 | 20130015590
Following consultation with legal counsel, he provided statements in his own behalf and requested a general discharge for the good of the service in lieu of trial by court-martial in accordance with chapter 10 of Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations - Enlisted Personnel). On 20 January 1981, the separation authority approved the applicant's request for discharge under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 10, for the good of the service, with an under other than...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2007 | 20070013278
THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE: 1. On 27 April 1979, the separation authority approved the applicants request for discharge and directed that he be issued an Under Other Than Honorable Conditions Discharge Certificate (DD Form 794A). On 4 May 1979. the applicant was discharged accordingly.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2005 | 20050013650C070206
The applicant requests that his records be corrected by upgrading his discharge. At the time of the applicant’s separation, the regulation provided for the issuance of an UOTHC discharge. There is no evidence in the available records nor did the applicant provide any documentation that he was told if he was AWOL for 75 days that he would be separated "for the good of the service."