| Mr. Carl W. S. Chun | Director | |
| Ms. Carolyn Wade | Analyst |
| Mr. Raymond J. Wagner | Chairperson | |
| Mr. Melvin H. Meyer | Member | |
| Ms. Margaret V. Thompson | Member |
APPLICANT REQUESTS: In effect, that his under other than honorable conditions (UOTHC) discharge be upgraded to an honorable discharge.
APPLICANT STATES: In effect, that he was discharged under the provisions of chapter 10, Army Regulation 635-200 and that he was told that his characterization of service was going to be under honorable conditions. He also states that his discharge was supposed to be mailed to him; however, he never received it. He states that, after 24 years of waiting, he finally requested it through the National Personnel Records Center online service. He further states that he was surprised to see that his characterization of service was UOTHC.
He submits a statement in his own behalf and a copy of his DD Form 214 (Report of Separation from Active Duty).
EVIDENCE OF RECORD: The applicant's military records show:
On 21 June 1974, the applicant enlisted in the Regular Army for a period of 4 years. He enlisted for the Cash Bonus and the Unit of Choice (XVIII Airborne Corps Artillery) Enlistment Options. Following completion of all required military training, the applicant was awarded military occupational specialty (MOS) 13B, Field Artillery Crewman, and was assigned to Fort Bragg, North Carolina.
On 25 December 1974, the applicant accepted nonjudicial punishment (NJP) under the provisions of Article 15, Uniform Code of Military Justice, for failing to go to his appointed place of duty. His punishment consisted of forfeiture of $89.00 pay per month for 1 month and 14 days’ extra duty (all suspended for 90 days).
On 10 January 1975 the applicant was promoted to private first class/E-3 and on 1 September 1975 he was promoted to specialist/E-4.
On 7 April 1976, the applicant accepted NJP for failing to go to his appointed place of duty. His punishment consisted of forfeiture of $100.00 pay per month for 1 month and reduction to private first class/E-3 (suspended for 60 days).
On 24 August 1976, the applicant departed the United States en route to Germany and arrived in Germany on/about 25 September 1974. He was assigned to Bravo Battery, 1st Battalion, 75th Field Artillery, Bamberg, Germany.
On/about 14 May 1977, while home on leave from Germany, the applicant departed his unit absent without leave (AWOL) and remained absent until he surrendered to military authorities on 17 July 1977 at Fort Bragg. He was assigned to the Personnel Control Facility (PCF), Fort Bragg.
On 22 July 1977, while assigned to the PCF at Fort Bragg, the applicant departed his unit AWOL and remained absent until civil authorities apprehended him on 29 May 1978 and returned him to military authorities on/about 4 June 1978.
On 13 June 1978, the applicant was charged with 2 specifications of AWOL. On the same date, after being advised by counsel of his rights, the applicant requested discharge under the provisions of chapter 10, Army Regulation 635-200 for the good of the service. The chain of command supported the approval of the applicant’s request, recommending a UOTHC discharge.
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.
Army Regulation 635-200, then in effect, 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 UOTHC was 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 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 Board noted that, after consulting with defense counsel, the applicant voluntarily, and in writing, requested separation from the Army in lieu of trial by court-martial. In doing so, the applicant admitted guilt to the stipulated offenses under the UCMJ. The Board was satisfied that all requirements of law and regulation were met and the rights of the applicant were fully protected throughout the separation process. Additionally, there is no indication in the record that the applicant was told he would receive an under honorable conditions discharge.
3. The applicant’s two lengthy periods of AWOL totaling 381 days constituted a departure from the standards of conduct expected of soldiers in the Army and adversely affected the quality of his service, brought discredit on the Army, and was prejudicial to good order and discipline. These incidents of misconduct clearly diminished the quality of his service below that meriting a general or honorable 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
__rjw___ __mhm___ __mvt___ DENY APPLICATION
| CASE ID | AR2003085936 |
| SUFFIX | |
| RECON | |
| DATE BOARDED | 20030930 |
| TYPE OF DISCHARGE | UOTHC |
| DATE OF DISCHARGE | 19780629 |
| DISCHARGE AUTHORITY | AR 635-200, Chap 10 |
| DISCHARGE REASON | A70.00 |
| BOARD DECISION | (DENY) |
| REVIEW AUTHORITY | |
| ISSUES 1. | 144.0133 |
| 2. | |
| 3. | |
| 4. | |
| 5. | |
| 6. |
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 | CY2001 | 2001065178C070421
Accordingly, on 2 November 1984, the applicant was discharged from the Army after completing 5 years, 3 months, and 23 days of creditable military service and accruing 293 days of lost time. 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...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2012 | 20120006025
On 19 April 1979, he was confined at Fort Bragg and returned to duty on 20 April 1979. General Court-Martial Order Number 15 issued by Headquarters, XVIII Airborne Corps and Fort Bragg, dated 23 April 1979, ordered the execution of his bad conduct discharge after the completion of all required post-trial and appellate reviews. The evidence of record shows he was almost 20 years of age at the time of his offenses; however, there is no evidence that indicates he was any less mature than...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2004 | 20040010881C070208
Marla J. N. Troup | |Member | The Board considered the following evidence: Exhibit A - Application for correction of military records. 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. Records show the applicant should have discovered the alleged error or injustice now under consideration on 7 March 1978; therefore, the time for the applicant to...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2001 | 2001065298C070421
This action was taken by Fort Bragg, in spite of the fact that the applicant had clearly been present for duty at the PCF, Fort Knox, for eight months and had successfully completed a rehabilitation program. A Personnel Action (DA Form 4187), dated 19 October 1999, prepared by the PCF, Fort Knox, changed the applicant’s duty status from present for duty to AWOL, effective 15 October 1999, and on 29 December 1999, the applicant returned to military control at the PCF, Fort Knox. However, it...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100009384
Application for correction of military records (with supporting documents provided, if any). Although an honorable or general discharge is authorized, an under other than honorable conditions discharge is normally considered appropriate. The applicant's contention that his under other than honorable conditions discharge should be upgraded to an honorable discharge and the evidence he submitted, including his prior active service and character reference letters, were carefully considered;...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080010704
Application for correction of military records (with supporting documents provided, if any). In his discharge request, the applicant indicated that he understood that by submitting the request for discharge, he was acknowledging his guilt of the charge against him or of a lesser included offense therein contained, which also authorized the imposition of a bad conduct or dishonorable discharge. On 14 March 1978. the separation authority approved the applicant's discharge under the...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2004 | 2004102910C070208
The evidence of record shows that on 30 July 1980, the applicant consulted with counsel and submitted a request for discharge from the service under chapter 10, AR 635-200, for the good of the service. There is no evidence that the applicant applied to the Army Discharge Review Board during its 15-year statute of limitations for an upgrade of her discharge. A discharge under other than honorable conditions is normally considered appropriate, but the separation authority may direct a...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090006411
Headquarters, U.S. Army Training Center and Fort Dix, Fort Dix, NJ, Special Court-Martial Order Number 79, dated 2 November 1978, shows that, after completion of all required post-trial and appellate reviews, the convening authority ordered the applicants bad conduct discharge executed. The DD Form 214 he was issued shows he was discharged in accordance with chapter 3 of Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations) as a result of court-martial with a bad conduct discharge. ...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2001 | 2001063909C070421
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: However, an Army Discharge Review Board (ADRB) Case Report and Directive, dated 15 February 1985, shows the applicant was charged with the above AWOL offense on 28 June 1983.