| Mr. Carl W. S. Chun | Director | |
| Ms. Deyon D. Battle | Analyst |
| Mr. Raymond V. O’Connor, Jr. | Chairperson | ||
| Mr. James E. Anderholm | Member | ||
| Ms. Linda M. Barker | Member |
APPLICANT REQUESTS: That his discharge under other than honorable conditions be upgraded to an honorable discharge.
APPLICANT STATES: In effect, that the type of discharge that he received was too harsh considering the nature of his offenses.
EVIDENCE OF RECORD: The applicant's military records show:
On 31 May 1974, he enlisted in the Army for 3 years in the pay grade of E-1. He successfully completed his training as a personnel management specialist. He remained on active duty through a series of continuous reenlistments.
Nonjudicial punishment (NJP) was imposed against the applicant on 16 July 1975, for wrongfully, with intent to deceive, changing the birthday on his military identification card. His punishment consisted of a reduction in pay grade, a forfeiture of pay and extra duty.
On 8 November 1976, NJP was imposed against him for failure to have his privately owned vehicle registered on post. His punishment consisted of a forfeiture of pay and extra duty.
On 8 August 1977, NJP was imposed against the applicant for being absent from his unit for 2 days. His punishment consisted of a forfeiture of pay.
He had NJP imposed against him again on 11 May 1979, for being absent from his appointed place of duty. His punishment consisted of a reduction in pay grade, a forfeiture of pay, restriction and extra duty.
Although it is not a part of the available record, the applicant was notified that charges were pending against him for sodomy, indecent acts and indecent liberties with his stepdaughter. The accusations were under investigation by the Criminal Investigation Division, when on 6 March 1985, after consulting with counsel, the applicant 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.
The appropriate authority approved the request for discharge on 2 April 1985. Accordingly, on 11 April 1985, 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 10 years, 10 months and 12 days of total active service.
On 14 May 1986, the Army Discharge Review Board denied the applicant’s request for an upgrade of his discharge.
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 applicant's 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. Although he may now believe that he made the wrong choice, he should not be allowed to change his mind at this late date and considering his acts of misconduct it does not appear that his discharge under other than honorable conditions is too severe.
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
__ja ____ ___rvo __ __ld ____ DENY APPLICATION
| CASE ID | AR2003088026 |
| SUFFIX | |
| RECON | |
| DATE BOARDED | 2003/08/14 |
| TYPE OF DISCHARGE | UOTHC |
| DATE OF DISCHARGE | 1985/04/11 |
| DISCHARGE AUTHORITY | AR 635-200, CH 10 |
| DISCHARGE REASON | 689 |
| BOARD DECISION | DENY |
| REVIEW AUTHORITY | |
| ISSUES 1. 706 | 144.7017/SERIOUS OFFENSE |
| 2. | |
| 3. | |
| 4. | |
| 5. | |
| 6. |
ARMY | BCMR | CY2003 | 2003088329C070403
The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein. APPLICANT REQUESTS: That his undesirable discharge be upgraded to an honorable or a general discharge. On 9 April 1975, the Army Discharge Review Board denied the applicant’s request for an upgrade of his discharge.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2003 | 2003084257C070212
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. EVIDENCE OF RECORD : The applicant's military records show: On 5 October 1976, he enlisted in the Army for 4 years in the pay grade of E-1.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2003 | 2003090682C070212
The applicant requests that his undesirable discharge be upgraded to an honorable discharge. 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. 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 justice to excuse the...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002083073C070215
The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein. APPLICANT STATES : That at the time of his enlistment and discharge he was immature. On 26 May 1983, the Army Discharge Review Board denied the applicant’s request for an upgrade of his discharge.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2006 | 20060002901C070205
The applicant requests that his discharge under other than honorable conditions be upgraded. He was transferred to Fort Dix, New Jersey, where charges were preferred against him for the AWOL charge. 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 | CY2006 | 20060006633C070205
The applicant requests that his undesirable discharge be upgraded to a more favorable 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. Records show the applicant should have discovered the alleged error or injustice now under consideration on 23 November 1976; therefore, the time for the applicant to file a request for correction of any...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080007257
There is no evidence in the available records that shows that the applicant was ever informed that his discharge would be upgraded within 6 months of his separation. The appropriate authority approved the request for discharge on 22 September 1981 and he directed the issuance of a discharge under other than honorable conditions. On 27 May 1986 the Army Discharge Review Board denied the applicant's petition to upgrade his discharge.
ARMY | BCMR | CY1996 | 9609493C070209
On 5 June 1990 the appropriate authority approved the applicants request for discharge and directed that he be issued a discharge UOTHC. 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. DISCUSSION: Considering all the evidence, allegations, and information...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2003 | 2003090205C070212
He was sentenced to a Bad Conduct Discharge (BCD), confinement at hard labor for 1 year, a reduction to the pay grade of E-1 and a forfeiture of all pay and allowances. On 17 June 1977, the Army Discharge Review Board (ADRB) dispatched a letter to the applicant informing him that his discharge had been upgraded to a general discharge under the SDRP. However, at the time of the applicant's separation the regulation provided for the issuance of an undesirable discharge.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2004 | 2004105250C070208
On 31 July 1969, he enlisted in the Army for 2 years, in the pay grade of E-1. The available records fails to show 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. 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...