| Mr. | Samuel A. Crumpler | Chairperson | |
| Ms. | Karen J. Newsome | Member | |
| Mr. | Raymond V. O’Connor, Jr. | Member |
| Mr. | Loren G. Harrell | Director | |
| Mrs. | Carolyn Wade | Analyst |
APPLICANT REQUESTS: In effect, that his undesirable discharge (UD) be upgraded to honorable.
APPLICANT STATES: In effect, that after arriving in Germany he met a girl; that he later discovered that girl was dating a lieutenant in his battery; that the lieutenant threatened to have him kicked out of service; and from that point on things slowly went downhill. He further states he was young, immature, and hardheaded at the time of the incidents, but feels he has matured.
EVIDENCE OF RECORD: The applicant's military records show:
On 17 March 1959 he enlisted in the Regular Army for a period of 3 years. At the time of his enlistment he was 17 years old, and had completed 9 years of formal education.
He completed one station unit training (OSUT) at Fort Chaffee, Arkansas. Upon completion of advanced individual training he was awarded military occupational specialty (MOS) 140 (Field Artillery) and assigned to Germany.
On 17 July 1959 he was promoted to the rank of private first class (E-3).
On 8 February 1960 a Line of Duty Investigation (LODI) was held to determine if the applicant’s fall through a glass roof of a building was in the line of duty. It was determined that the applicant’s fall was not in the line of duty and not due to misconduct on his part.
Between 27 February and 19 September 1960 he accumulated the following: one nonjudicial punishment (NJP) under the provisions of Article 15, UCMJ; three summary courts-martial; two special courts-martial; two periods of confinement at hard labor; five forfeitures totaling $550.00 and accrued a total of 95 days of lost time.
On 12 October 1960 his commanding officer initiated action to have him discharged from the Army for unfitness under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-208 due to his one NJP and four courts-martial for serious infractions of military discipline.
After being counseled by his commanding officer, he authenticated a statement with his signature in which he acknowledged notification of his commander’s intent, declined representation by legal counsel, and declined a board of officers hearing.
On 7 December 1960 the appropriate authority approved the recommendation for discharge. Accordingly, on 7 January 1961 the applicant was discharged from the Army after completing 1 year, 6 months, and 18 days of active military service and accruing 95 days of lost time.
Army Regulation 635-208, then in effect, provided in pertinent part the policies, procedures, and guidance for the prompt elimination of enlisted personnel who were determined to be unfit for further military service. Individuals discharged under this regulation would normally be issued a UD.
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 applicant provided no evidence that his age or level of maturity impaired his ability to be a good soldier or that he was any less mature than other soldiers of the same age who successfully completed military service.
3. The evidence of record indicates the command attempted to assist the applicant in performing and conducting himself according to Army standards by providing him counseling, summary and special courts-martial, and a rehabilitative transfer to another unit. The applicant failed to respond appropriately to these efforts.
4. The applicant by continuing his pattern of misconduct and poor duty performance left his commanding officer no choice but to initiate separation action.
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
________ ________ ________ DENY APPLICATION
Loren G. Harrell
Director
ARMY | BCMR | CY1997 | 199707056C070209
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. EVIDENCE OF RECORD: The...
ARMY | BCMR | CY1997 | 9711410
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. 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...
ARMY | BCMR | CY1997 | 199706345
The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein. APPLICANT REQUESTS: That his general discharge under the Special Discharge Review Program (SDRP) be upgraded to honorable. On 25 August 1976 he applied to the Army Discharge Review Board (ADRB) for an upgrade of his discharge to honorable.
ARMY | BCMR | CY1997 | 9711499
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. On 29 April 1965 the Army...
ARMY | BCMR | CY1997 | 9708317
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. The applicant requests...
ARMY | BCMR | CY1997 | 9708334
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. The Board examined the...
ARMY | BCMR | CY1997 | 9707056
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. The applicant requests...
ARMY | BCMR | CY1997 | 9708813
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. However, it does include an...
ARMY | BCMR | CY1997 | 9710284C070209
APPLICANT REQUESTS: In effect, an upgrade of his general discharge to an honorable discharge. On 15 April 1960, he was discharged, in pay grade E-1, under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-209, unsuitability, character behavior disorder, with a general discharge. There is no evidence the applicant ever submitted an application to the Army Discharge Review Board (ADRB); for an upgraded discharge.
ARMY | BCMR | CY1997 | 9710284
On 18 May 1959, the applicant was convicted by special court-martial for being absent without leave (AWOL) from 20 March - 23 April 1959. On 15 April 1960, he was discharged, in pay grade E-1, under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-209, unsuitability, character behavior disorder, with a general discharge. Army Regulation 635-209 set forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel for unsuitability.