Search Decisions

Decision Text

ARMY | BCMR | CY2013 | 20130002936
Original file (20130002936.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

		IN THE CASE OF:	  

		BOARD DATE:  8 October 2013

		DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20130002936 


THE BOARD CONSIDERED THE FOLLOWING EVIDENCE:

1.  Application for correction of military records (with supporting documents provided, if any).

2.  Military Personnel Records and advisory opinions (if any).


THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE:

1.  The applicant requests his under other than honorable conditions (UOTHC) discharge be upgraded.  

2.  He states he wants his discharge upgraded for the purpose of seeking employment.  He doesn't wish this upgrade for benefits or any other type of services.  It has been over 30 years since his discharge.  He only asks for a little help in trying to obtain a job in the truck driver field.  

3.  He provides no additional documents.

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  Title 10, U.S. Code, section 1552(b), provides that applications for correction of military records must be filed within 3 years after discovery of the alleged error or injustice.  This provision of law also allows the Army Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR) to excuse an applicant's failure to timely file within the 3-year statute of limitations if the ABCMR determines it would be in the interest of justice to do so.  While it appears the applicant did not file within the time frame provided in the statute of limitations, the ABCMR has elected to conduct a substantive review of this case and, only to the extent relief, if any, is granted, has determined it is in the interest of justice to excuse the applicant's failure to timely file.  In all other respects, there are insufficient bases to waive the statute of limitations for timely filing.

2.  The applicant enlisted in the Regular Army on 17 September 1981.  
3.  His discharge packet is not available for review.  His DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) shows he was discharged on 16 March 1988 under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations - Enlisted Personnel), chapter 10, for the good of the service – in lieu of court-martial with issuance of a UOTHC discharge.  He completed 
6 years, 5 months, and 30 days total active military service.  

4.  His service record doesn’t indicate he applied to the Army Discharge Review Board within its 15-year statute of limitations.  

5.  Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel.  Chapter 10 provides 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 UOTHC is normally considered appropriate.

	a.  Paragraph 3-7a provides that an honorable discharge is a separation with honor and entitles the recipient to benefits provided by law.  The honorable characterization is appropriate when the quality of the member's service generally has met the standards of acceptable conduct and performance of duty for Army personnel or is otherwise so meritorious that any other characterization would be clearly inappropriate.

	b.  Paragraph 3-7b provides that a general discharge is a separation from the Army under honorable conditions.  When authorized, it is issued to a Soldier whose military record is satisfactory but not sufficiently meritorious to warrant an honorable discharge.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant states he wants his discharge upgraded for the purpose of employment.  However, the ABCMR does not amend/or correct military records solely for the purpose of making the applicant eligible for employment or employment benefits.  Additionally, in order to justify correction of a military record the applicant must show or it must otherwise satisfactorily appear, that the record is in error or unjust.  The applicant did not submit any evidence that would satisfy this requirement.  

2.  The applicant's record is void of the specific facts and circumstances surrounding his discharge.  It appears that he was charged with the commission of an offense(s) punishable under the Uniform Code of Military Justice with a punitive discharge.  Discharges under the provisions of Army Regulation 
635-200, chapter 10, are voluntary requests for discharge in lieu of trial by court-martial.  The applicant is presumed to have voluntarily, willingly, and in writing, requested discharge from the Army in lieu of trial by court-martial.  In doing so, he waived his opportunity to appear before a court-martial.  It is also presumed that all requirements of law and regulation were met and the rights of the applicant were fully protected throughout the separation process.  Furthermore, in the absence of evidence showing otherwise, it must be presumed that his discharge accurately reflects his overall record of service during this period.

3.  A UOTHC discharge was normally appropriate for a Soldier discharged under chapter 10.  It appears the separation authority determined the applicant's overall service did not meet the standards of acceptable conduct and performance of duty to warrant a general or fully honorable discharge.  

4.  The evidence of record does not indicate the actions taken in his case were in error or unjust.  Therefore, there is no basis for granting the requested relief.

BOARD VOTE:

________  ________  ________  GRANT FULL RELIEF 

________  ________  ________  GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF 

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

____X___  ____X___  ___X__ _  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.



      _______ _  X ______   ___
               CHAIRPERSON
      
I certify that herein is recorded the true and complete record of the proceedings of the Army Board for Correction of Military Records in this case.


ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20130002936





3


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20130002936



3


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

Similar Decisions

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140019454

    Original file (20140019454.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    However, his DD Form 214 shows he was issued an UOTHC discharged in lieu of trial by court-martial effective 17 March 1989 under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations – Enlisted Personnel), chapter 10, by reason of administrative discharge – conduct triable by court-martial. There is no available evidence showing he applied to the Army Discharge Review Board for a review and upgrade of his discharge within its 15-year statute of limitations. ...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | 20110017393

    Original file (20110017393.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant requests an upgrade of his under other than honorable conditions (UOTHC) discharge to an honorable or general discharge. He voluntarily submitted a request for discharge for the good of the service in lieu of trial by court-martial. The characterization of service for this type of discharge is normally UOTHC and the evidence shows he was aware of that prior to requesting discharge.

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090021581

    Original file (20090021581.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant requests his under other than honorable conditions (UOTHC) discharge be upgraded to an honorable discharge (HD). The applicant’s record shows he departed absent without leave (AWOL) from his unit on 5 May 1980. Absent any evidence of record or independent evidence provided by the applicant to the contrary, it is presumed that the applicant's discharge processing was accomplished in accordance with the applicable regulation and that all requirements of law and regulation were...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090012541

    Original file (20090012541.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant requests upgrade of his under other than honorable conditions (UOTHC) discharge to an honorable discharge (HD). The record does contain a properly-constituted DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) which shows the applicant was separated under the provisions of chapter 10, Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations), in lieu of trial by court-martial on 28 October 1981 and that he received a UOTHC discharge. A UOTHC discharge is normally...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080017200

    Original file (20080017200.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE: 1. On 6 May 1987, the separation authority approved the applicant's discharge request and directed the applicant receive an UOTHC discharge and that he be reduced to the lowest enlisted grade. There is no evidence showing that the applicant applied to the Army Discharge Review Board (ADRB) for an upgrade of his discharge within that board's 15-year statute of limitations.

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140015697

    Original file (20140015697.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The DD Form 214 identifies the authority and reason for the applicant's discharge, which shows he was discharged under the provisions of chapter 10, Army Regulation 635-200, for the good of the service in lieu of court-martial, and that he received an under other than honorable conditions (UOTHC) discharge. Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel. The evidence of record confirms the ADRB determined the applicant's UOTHC discharge was...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140013080

    Original file (20140013080.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant states: a. He acknowledged that by submitting his request for discharge he was guilty of a charge against him that authorized the imposition of a bad conduct or dishonorable discharge. On 1 February 1991, the separation authority approved the applicant's voluntary request for discharge and directed the issuance of a discharge UOTHC.

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080006282

    Original file (20080006282.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant requests, in effect, that his under other than honorable conditions (UOTHC) discharge be upgraded to a general discharge (GD). This provision of law also allows the Army Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR) to excuse an applicant’s failure to timely file within the 3-year statute of limitations if the ABCMR determines it would be in the interest of justice to do so. Paragraph 3-7c(7) specifically addresses issuance of a UOTHC for discharges issued under the...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | 20110005598

    Original file (20110005598.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Application for correction of military records (with supporting documents provided, if any). Although an honorable or general discharge is authorized a UOTHC discharge is normally considered appropriate. When authorized, it is issued to a Soldier whose military record is satisfactory but not sufficiently meritorious to warrant an honorable discharge.

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2012 | 20120012249

    Original file (20120012249.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant’s military records are not available to the Board. On the same day, the separation authority approved the applicant's request for discharge for the good of the service, reduced the applicant to the lowest enlisted grade and directed that he be issued a UOTHC discharge. _______ _ _X______ ___ CHAIRPERSON I certify that herein is recorded the true and complete record of the proceedings of the Army Board for Correction of Military Records in this case.