APPLICANT REQUESTS: That his record be corrected to show that he was discharged by reason of physical disability.
APPLICANT STATES: That his medical condition has deteriorated since he was discharged.
EVIDENCE OF RECORD: The applicant's military and medical records show:
On 6 January 1981, he enlisted in the Regular Army, in pay grade E-3. He was advanced to pay grade E-4 effective 13 May 1981.
On 3 August 1981, a mental status evaluation indicated that he possessed a historic personality disorder and recommended he be considered for discharge.
On 31 August 1981, he accepted nonjudicial punishment under Article 15, Uniform Code of Military Justice, for his failure to go to his appointed place of duty on 27 August 1981. His punishment included a reduction to pay grade E-3, restriction and extra duty.
On 3 September 1981, a physical examination cleared the applicant for separation.
On 28 September 1981, the unit commander notified the applicant of his intention to recommend his separation under Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 13-4b, for unsuitability - personality disorder and of his rights.
On 29 September 1981, the applicant, with legal counsel, responded to the commander by waiving consideration of and personal appearance before a board of officers and legal counsel and by declining to make statements in his own behalf.
On 29 September 1981, the commander recommended the applicants discharge with an honorable discharge (HD).
On 22 October 1981, the appropriate separation authority approved his discharge and directed he receive an HD.
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 the aforementioned requirement.
2. The discharge proceedings were conducted in accordance with law and regulations applicable at the time.
3. The evidence in this case does not support his contention that there was an error or injustice in his discharge proceedings.
4. In view of the above, there is no basis for granting the applicants 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
DENY APPLICATION
Karl F. Schneider
Acting Director
ARMY | BCMR | CY2001 | 2001056343C070420
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 IDAR2001056343SUFFIXRECONDATE BOARDED20010830TYPE OF DISCHARGE(UOTHC)DATE OF DISCHARGE19820311DISCHARGE AUTHORITYAR635-200, CHAPTER 10 DISCHARGE REASONA70.00BOARD DECISION(DENY)REVIEW AUTHORITYISSUES 1.144.70002.3.4.5.6.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2001 | 2001064103C070421
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 to authorize a formal hearing, recommend that the records be corrected without a formal hearing, or to deny the application without a formal hearing if it is determined that insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate the existence of probable material error or injustice. Pertinent Army Regulations...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2001 | 2001052274C070420
On 28 October 1985, the commander notified the applicant that he was being recommended for discharge under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 14, for misconduct. The applicant's GD issued on 18 November 1985, for misconduct, was administratively correct and in conformance with the applicable regulations then in effect. That all of the Department of the Army records related to this case be corrected by issuing to the individual concerned a DD Form 215 showing in Item 18 that...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002069983C070402
The Board considered the following evidence: He believes that his PTSD symptoms are related to the rape incident in Vietnam. He had completed 11 months and 18 days of active military service.
CG | BCMR | Disability Cases | 2005-125
The Coast Guard medical record contains no evidence that the applicant suffered from a mental disability prior to his discharge. In addition there is no evidence in the record that from the time of the applicant's discharge from the Coast Guard in 1981 until 2000 that he was treated for any problems with his wrist. The fact that the DVA granted the applicant a service-connected disability for a wrist injury some twenty years after his discharge from the Coast Guard is not persuasive...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002068160C070402
The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein. In support of his request the applicant submits copies of his medical records The evidence of record indicates that the applicant did not have any medically unfitting disability which required physical disability processing.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2006 | 20060014306
x The Board considered the following evidence: Exhibit A - Application for correction of military records. The separation document (DD Form 214) he was issued at the time shows he completed a total of 2 years, 9 months, and 2 days of active military service and that he had accrued 29 days of time lost due to AWOL. The applicant's claim that his command had informed him that separation from the military for personality disorder warranted an HD and that he would be discharged with an HD was...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2007 | 20070000278C071108
The applicant requests that his discharge under other than honorable conditions be upgraded due to his mental health. Further, the applicant failed to provide evidence that his conduct since his discharge has been so meritorious as to warrant an upgrade of his discharge as a matter of equity. Records show the applicant exhausted his administrative remedies in this case when his case was last reviewed by the ADRB on 4 March 1982; therefore, the time for the applicant to file a request for...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2001 | 2001064332C070421
On the same date, the Cadre Review Board determined that the applicant should be separated under the On 6 October 1983, the Army Discharge Review Board denied the applicant’s request for an upgrade of his discharge. Army policy states that a UOTHC discharge is normally considered appropriate, but a GD under honorable conditions or an honorable discharge may be granted.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002078884C070215
On 31 July 1986, a bar to reenlistment was imposed on the applicant. The division psychologist opined that, the problems the applicant had in getting up reflects poor motivation to go to work. On 28 September 2001, the ADRB notified the applicant that his application to that board had been denied and that he could apply to this Board for correction of his military records.