Search Decisions

Decision Text

ARMY | BCMR | CY2003 | 2003090623C070212
Original file (2003090623C070212.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied




RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


         IN THE CASE OF:
        

         BOARD DATE: 12 February 2004
         DOCKET NUMBER: AR2003090623


         I certify that hereinafter is recorded the true and complete record of the proceedings of the Army Board for Correction of Military Records in the case of the above-named individual.

Mr. Carl W. S. Chun Director
Ms. Rosa M. Chandler Analyst


The following members, a quorum, were present:

Ms. Joann H. Langston Chairperson
Mr. Lester Echols Member
Mr. Robert J. Osborn, II Member

         The applicant and counsel if any, did not appear before the Board.

         The Board considered the following evidence:

         Exhibit A - Application for correction of military records.

         Exhibit B - Military Personnel Records (including advisory opinion, if any).

THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE:


1. The applicant requests that his undesirable discharge (UD) be upgraded to a fully honorable discharge.

2. The applicant states, in effect, he was separated for being absent without leave (AWOL) and that he was advised his discharge would be upgraded to that of a general discharge after 6 months. The type of discharge he received denies him job opportunities.

3. The applicant provides nothing in support of his request.

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1. The applicant served in the United States Army Reserve Delayed Entry Program (DEP) from 27 December 1996 to 27 January 1997 when he was honorably separated and enlisted in the Regular Army for 3 years and training in military occupational specialty (MOS) 63B (Light Wheel Vehicle Mechanic). He completed the training requirements and he was awarded MOS 63B.

2. On 23 August 1997, the applicant was assigned to Korea. On 5 May 1998, the applicant departed his unit in an AWOL status and he remained AWOL until he was returned to military control at the Personnel Control Facility, Fort Knox, Kentucky on 28 October 1998. The highest rank that he achieved during this period was private first class, pay grade E-3.

3. The applicant's records do not contain all of the facts and circumstances surrounding the discharge process. However, his records do contain a properly constituted DD Form 214 that was prepared at the time of his separation. The DD Form 214 shows that on 9 February 2000, he was separated for the good of the service-in lieu of trial by court-martial, under the provisions of chapter 10, Army Regulation 635-200, in pay grade E1 with a UOTHC discharge. He had completed 2 years, 6 months and 14 days of active military service and he had 179 days of lost time due to being AWOL.

4. On 7 May 2003, the Army Discharge Review Board (ADRB) denied the applicant's request for an upgrade of his discharge.

5. 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 was authorized, a UOTHC discharge was then considered appropriate.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1. The available records show the applicant was discharged under the provisions of chapter 10, Army Regulation 635-200, for the good of the service. Although the facts and circumstances surrounding the discharge process are missing, he would have been charged with the commission of an offense punishable under the UCMJ with a punitive discharge. He would have consulted with defense counsel and signed a statement indicating that he had been informed he could receive a UOTHC discharge and the ramifications of receiving such a discharge. He would have voluntarily requested discharge to avoid trial by court-martial. In doing so, he would have admitted guilt to the stipulated offense(s) under the UCMJ. The Board presumes administrative regularity and the applicant has provided no information that would indicate the contrary.

2. The US Army does not have, nor has it ever had, a policy to automatically upgrade a discharge or to accept a request for the upgrade of a discharge after a certain amount of time. Each case is decided on its own merits when an applicant submits a DD Form 149 (Application for Correction of Military Record) requesting a change in discharge. Changes may be warranted if the evidence supports that the characterization of service or the reason(s) for discharge, or both, were improper or inequitable. The applicant has provided no evidence to support either.

3. A denial of job opportunities does not establish a basis for the upgrade of a discharge.

BOARD VOTE:

________ ________ ________ GRANT RELIEF

________ ________ ________ GRANT FORMAL HEARING

__jhl___ __le____ __rjo___ DENY APPLICATION

BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION:


The evidence presented does not demonstrate the existence of a probable error or injustice. Therefore, the Board determined that the overall merits of this case are insufficient as a basis for correction of the records of the individual concerned.




                           Joann Langston
                  ______________________
                  CHAIRPERSON




INDEX

CASE ID AR2003090623
SUFFIX
RECON
DATE BOARDED 20040212
TYPE OF DISCHARGE (UD)
DATE OF DISCHARGE 20000209
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY AR635-200, Chap 10
DISCHARGE REASON A70.00
BOARD DECISION (DENY)
REVIEW AUTHORITY
ISSUES 1. 144.0400
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.


Similar Decisions

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2003 | 2003091097C070212

    Original file (2003091097C070212.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Board considered the following evidence: EVIDENCE OF RECORD : The applicant's military records show: However, there is a separation document (DD Form 214) on file that confirms that on 31 August 1970, he received an UD under the provisions of chapter 10, Army Regulation 635-200, in lieu of trial by court-martial.

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2003 | 2003088724C070403

    Original file (2003088724C070403.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein. The Board considered the following evidence: The applicant submits no documents in support of his application, but he does claim that cannot get a job and he requests that his overall record of service be considered.

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY1997 | 9705660

    Original file (9705660.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Accordingly, on 20 March 1974 the applicant was discharged after completing 7 months and 1 day of active military service and accruing 306 days of time lost due to AWOL. On 4 April 1984 the Army Discharge Review Board denied the applicant's request for an upgrade to his discharge and found that the discharge process was proper in all respects. Chapter 10 of that regulation provides, in pertinent part, that a member who has committed an offense or offenses for which the authorized...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY1997 | 9709410

    Original file (9709410.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    In accordance with Army Regulation 15-185, the application and the available military records pertinent to the corrective action requested were reviewed to determine whether the application was filed within the time established by statute, and if not, whether it would be in the interest of justice to waive the failure to timely file. PURPOSE : To determine whether the application was submitted within the time limit established by law, and if not, whether it is in the interest of justice to...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2001 | 2001063300C070421

    Original file (2001063300C070421.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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: Carl W. S. Chun Director, Army Board for Correction of Military RecordsINDEXCASE IDAR200106330SUFFIXRECONYYYYMMDDDATE BOARDED2002/03/14TYPE OF DISCHARGE(UD)DATE OF DISCHARGE19700403DISCHARGE AUTHORITYAR635-200, Chapter 10 .

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002080364C070215

    Original file (2002080364C070215.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein. 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: Therefore, the Board concludes that an upgrade of the applicant’s discharge is not warranted at this time.

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2003 | 2003085478C070212

    Original file (2003085478C070212.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    APPLICANT STATES : In effect, that the overall quality of his service was not considered in determining the type of discharge he would receive as a result of his voluntarily requesting to be discharged for the good of the service/in lieu of trial by court-martial. EVIDENCE OF RECORD : The applicant's military records show: 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...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2001 | 2001060394C070421

    Original file (2001060394C070421.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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: The separation document confirms that the applicant was discharged for the good of the service/in lieu of trial by court-martial.

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2001 | 2001061469C070421

    Original file (2001061469C070421.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein. The evidence of record shows the applicant was discharged under the provisions of chapter 10, Army Regulation 635-200, for the good of the service in lieu of trial by court-martial. 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...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2001 | 2001059879C070421

    Original file (2001059879C070421.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein. 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. The evidence of record shows the applicant...