IN THE CASE OF:  

BOARD DATE:  25 August 2020

DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20200001584


APPLICANT REQUESTS:  The applicant requests an upgrade of his under other than 
honorable conditions (UOTHC) discharge to general, under honorable conditions.  

APPLICANT'S SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS CONSIDERED BY THE BOARD: 

*	DD Form 149 (Application for Correction of Military Record)
*	DD Form 293 (Application for the Review of Discharge)
*	DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty)

FACTS:

1.  The applicant did not file within the three year time frame provided in Title 10, United 
States Code (USC), section 1552 (b); however, the Army Board for Correction of 
Military Records conducted a substantive review of this case and determined it is in the 
interest of justice to excuse the applicant's failure to timely file. 

2.  The applicant states “they have not showed” anything about when he was in the 
hospital for 8 to 9 days for his left leg and foot and “no papers for AWOL” (absent 
without leave).  “They are making me look bad.  I went in the Army to do my job”.  He 
cannot use his left foot or leg.  He was hospitalized in Fort Dix, New Jersey.   

3.  On 21 March 1979, the applicant enlisted in the Regular Army for a period of 4 
years.  He did not complete training requirements; therefore, he was not awarded a 
military occupational specialty.      

4.  His record contained medical documents that show he was treated for ankle and foot 
injuries while attending basic and advanced individual training.

5.  On 19 April 1979, a Personnel Action form shows the applicant’s duty status was 
changed from present for duty to hospitalization.  

6.  On 14 and 15 May 1979, a Standard Form 513 (Consultation Sheet) shows a 
request was submitted for the applicant to be evaluated at the Community Mental 
Health Activity, Fort Dix, NJ.  The reason for the request was based on the applicant 
having somatic complaints, hyperventilation, and anxiety.  The provisional diagnosis 
was situational anxiety.  In pertinent part, the consultation report stated:

	a.  The applicant complained of nervousness and breathing difficulty associated with 
situational stress and concerns about his mother’s and brother's welfare.  He desired to 
remain in service if he could be stationed near his home.  

	b.  He reported having experienced nervousness and breathing difficulty ever since 
his parents separated when he was 15 years old.  

	c.  A mental status evaluation indicated the applicant was oriented.  There was no 
evidence of a thought disorder, process or content.  His memory was intact.  Affect 
appropriate and his mood was depressed.  He appeared extremely tense, and denied 
any homicidal or suicidal ideations.  

	d.  “Tr:  Intake and supportive counseling.  Imp:  Acute situational maladjustment.”  

	e.  The applicant was returned to duty and scheduled for a return appointment to the 
Community Mental Health Activity on 22 May 1979 for supportive counseling and 
relaxation therapy.  “No meds.”  

7.  His record contained additional Personnel Action forms that show on:   

*	19 May 1979, his duty status was changed from hospitalization to present for 
duty
*	21 May 1979, his duty status was changed from present for duty to AWOL 
*	19 June 1979, he was dropped from the Army’s rolls  
*	8 November 1980, his duty status was changed to present for duty; the 
applicant was apprehended by civil authorities in Vidalia, GA 

8.  On 19 November 1980, court-martial charges were preferred against the applicant 
for being AWOL from on or about 21 May to 10 November 1980.  

	a.  On the same date, the applicant voluntarily requested discharge for the good of 
the service in lieu of trial by court-martial under the provisions of chapter 10, Army 
Regulation (AR) 635-200 (Personnel Separations – Enlisted Personnel).  He consulted 
with legal counsel and was advised of the basis for the trial by court-martial, his 
available rights and the basis for voluntarily requesting discharge under the provisions 
of AR 635-200, chapter 10.  The applicant elected not to submit a statement in his own 
behalf.   

	b.  A mental status evaluation psychiatrically cleared him for administrative 
separation proceedings. 

	c.  His chain of command recommended approval of his request, and stated in 
pertinent part:  

		(1)  The applicant stated that his approximate 173 days of AWOL were caused 
by family problems.  He stated that he was attending Basic Training at Fort Dix, NJ 
when his mother notified him that he was needed at home.  His father had become ill 
and his mother was having difficulty paying the monthly bills.  The applicant said that his 
family's problems caused him a great deal of concern and eventually he decided that it 
would be best if he departed AWOL, which he did after six weeks of Basic Training.  He 
had no desire to remain in the Army and stated that he must return to his family at once, 
even if it meant going AWOL again.  

		(2)  In view of the applicant’s attitude toward the military, and his lack of 
rehabilitative potential, his chain of command recommended discharge Under Other 
Than Honorable Conditions in accordance with chapter 10, AR 635-200.  There were no 
legal objections to the further processing in accordance with the unit commander’s 
recommendations.    

	d.  On 9 December 1980, the appropriate separation authority approved the 
applicant's discharge request and directed he be reduced to the lowest enlisted grade 
unless already serving in that grade.  The separation authority also directed the 
applicant be furnished an UOTHC Discharge Certificate.    

9.  On 16 December 1980, the applicant was discharged accordingly.  His service was 
characterized as UOTHC.  He completed 3 months and 9 days of net active service.  He 
had lost time from 21 May 1979 to 7 November 1980.  The applicant was not awarded a 
personal decoration.  

10.  AR 635-200 states a Chapter 10 is a voluntary discharge request for the good of 
the service in-lieu of trial by court martial.  In pertinent part, the regulation states 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 in lieu of 
trial by court-martial.  Although an honorable or general discharge is authorized, a 
discharge under other than honorable conditions is normally considered appropriate.  A 
member may be awarded an honorable or general discharge, if during the current 
enlistment period of obligated service he has been awarded a personal decoration or if 
warranted by the particular circumstances of a specific case.  

11.  In reaching its determination, the Board can consider the applicant’s petition and 
service record in accordance with the published equity, injustice, or clemency 
determination guidance.           

BOARD DISCUSSION:

After review of the application and all evidence, the Board determined there is 
insufficient evidence to grant relief.  The board applied Office of the Secretary of 
Defense standards of liberal consideration and clemency to the complete evidentiary 
record, including the applicant’s statement and found insufficient evidence of error, 
injustice, or inequity.

1.  The applicant opted to receive a chapter 10 discharge in lieu of Court Martial for 
AWOL and Desertion.

2.  There is some evidence that the applicant had situational anxiety while attending 
Basic Training, but that it was a preexisting condition.  After his lengthy desertion, 
during separation proceedings, his command noted that the applicant stated that he 
deserted the Army due to his father’s illness and his mother wanting him to come home.  
However, there is insufficient evidence that the applicant informed his Basic Training 
chain of command of his family issues.  Prior to his AWOL, the record supports the 
applicant’s statement that he was injured and was in the hospital.  However, there is no 
indication that the injury was severe enough to warrant further medical treatment.  The 
Board considered these factors.

3.  The Board found limited evidence of creditable, honorable service.  The applicant 
only served in the Army for 3 months and 9 days and never left Basic Training before 
going AWOL and deserting.  A chapter 10 discharge is appropriate in this case for the 
applicant’s desertion, which is considered a serious offense.

4.  The Board agreed there is insufficient evidence of administrative irregularity in this 
case.  Therefore, the Board found that the applicant’s discharge characterization is 
appropriate.


BOARD VOTE:

Mbr 1	Mbr 2	Mbr 3

:	:	:	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 the overall merits of this case are insufficient 
as a basis for correction of the records of the individual concerned.


 

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.


REFERENCES:

1.  Title 10, USC, section 1552(b), provides that applications for correction of military 
records must be filed within three 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 three-year statute of 
limitations if the ABCMR determines it would be in the interest of justice to do so.
2.  Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations – Enlisted Personnel) set forth the 
basic authority for the administrative separation of enlisted personnel.

	a.  Chapter 10 stated a member who was charged with an offense or offenses for 
which the authorized punishment included a punitive discharge could submit a request 
for discharge for the good of the service in lieu of trial by court-martial.  The request 
could be submitted at any time after charges had been preferred and must have 
included the individual's admission of guilt.  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.

	b.  An honorable discharge was a separation with honor and entitled the recipient to 
benefits provided by law. The honorable characterization was appropriate when the 
quality of the member’s service generally had met the standards of acceptable conduct 
and performance of duty for Army personnel or was otherwise so meritorious that any 
other characterization would have been clearly inappropriate.

	c.  A general discharge was a separation from the Army under honorable conditions. 
When authorized, it was issued to a Soldier whose military record was satisfactory but 
not sufficiently meritorious to warrant an honorable discharge.

     d.  An under other than honorable conditions discharge is an administrative 
separation from the service under conditions other than honorable.  It may be issued for 
misconduct.  In a case in which an UOTHC is authorized by regulation, a member may 
be awarded an honorable or general discharge, if during the current enlistment period of 
obligated service he has been awarded a personal decoration or if warranted by the 
particular circumstances of a specific case.

3.  On 25 July 2018, the Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness 
issued guidance to Military Discharge Review Boards and Boards for Correction of
Military/Naval Records (BCM/NRs) regarding equity, injustice, or clemency 
determinations. Clemency generally refers to relief specifically granted from a criminal 
sentence.  BCM/NRs may grant clemency regardless of the type of court-martial. 
However, the guidance applies to more than clemency from a sentencing in a court-
martial; it also applies to other corrections, including changes in a discharge, which may 
be warranted based on equity or relief from injustice.

	a.  This guidance does not mandate relief, but rather provides standards and 
principles to guide Boards in application of their equitable relief authority.  In 
determining whether to grant relief on the basis of equity, injustice, or clemency 
grounds, BCM/NRs shall consider the prospect for rehabilitation, external evidence, 
sworn testimony, policy changes, relative severity of misconduct, mental and behavioral 
health conditions, official governmental acknowledgement that a relevant error or 
injustice was committed, and uniformity of punishment.

	b.  Changes to the narrative reason for discharge and/or an upgraded character of 
service granted solely on equity, injustice, or clemency grounds normally should not 
result in separation pay, retroactive promotions, and payment of past medical expenses 
or similar benefits that might have been received if the original discharge had been for 
the revised reason or had the upgraded service characterization.    

//NOTHING FOLLOWS//
ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)	 AR20200001584


6
ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)	AR20200001584


1