| Mr. Loren G. Harrell | Director | |
| Mrs. Nancy Amos | Analyst |
| Mr. Calvin M. Fowler | Chairperson | |
| Ms. Irene E. Wheelwright | Member | |
| Ms. Margaret K. Patterson | Member |
APPLICANT REQUESTS: That his general discharge be upgraded to an honorable discharge. He also requests an official document stating that John F. Kennedy was the President at the time of his enlistment and requests to know what his service number stands for.
APPLICANT STATES: He was born in Austria so his primary language was German, not English. He found out one year ago that he lost his Austrian citizenship when he enlisted in the U. S. Army. He missed bed check. Traitors and drug addicts have received honorable discharges; he should, too.
EVIDENCE OF RECORD: The applicant's military records show:
He was born in Austria. When he was about 21 years old, he came to the United States to find his mother. He found her in California and soon thereafter, on 30 October 1963, he enlisted in the Regular Army. His conduct and efficiency ratings during basic training and advanced individual training were “excellent.” He requested assignment to Europe, arrived there on 11 May 1964 and was assigned to Company A, 793d Military Police Battalion. His conduct and efficiency ratings were “excellent” when he was reassigned to U. S. Army Garrison, Giessen on 13 October 1964.
Between January and July 1965, the applicant accepted non-judicial punishment on three occasions for being absent without proper authority (twice) and frequenting an off-limits establishment.
Between March and August 1965, the applicant was convicted by two summary courts-martial and one special court-martial for breaking restriction; being absent without proper authority and falsifying an official document; and failing to go to his appointed place of duty and breaking restriction, respectively.
On 24 August 1965, discharge action was initiated to separate the applicant under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-208 for unfitness.
On 24 August 1965, the applicant acknowledged that he was advised of the basis for the separation action. He declined requesting (sic) counsel, waived a hearing of his case by a board of officers, and did not submit a statement in his own behalf.
On 24 September 1965, the action was returned to the commander inviting his attention to the Report of Psychiatric Examination (not available) and the recommendation of administrative action under Army Regulation 635-209 (for unsuitability).
On 1 October 1965, the commander still recommended separation for unfitness.
On 12 October 1965, the appropriate commander directed the applicant’s discharge under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-209 for unsuitability and directed he receive a general discharge.
On 28 October 1965, the applicant was discharged, with a general discharge, under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-209 for unsuitability in pay grade E-1. He had completed 1 year, 11 months and 29 days of creditable active service and had no lost time.
Army Regulation 635-209 set forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel for unsuitability. That regulation provided, in pertinent part, that a member with a character or behavior disorder, disorder of intelligence, or transient personality disorder due to acute or special stress and was unlikely to develop sufficiently to participate in further military training and or become a satisfactory soldier, would be discharged for unsuitability.
On 20 February 1967, the applicant appeared and testified before the Army Discharge Review Board (ADRB). In his testimony, he stated that he had requested permission to marry but it was denied because he was not an American citizen, but he had lost his Austrian citizenship upon his enlistment in the American Army. He replied affirmatively to the question “…did you deliberately cause this bad record of disciplinary infractions or violations of rules to get thrown out of the Army? Did you break restriction specifically to get them mad enough at you to give you a discharge?” The ADRB denied his request for an upgrade.
On 15 August 1977, the ADRB denied the applicant’s request for an upgrade under the DOD Discharge Review Program (Special).
John F. Kennedy was President of the United States from the date of his inauguration on 20 January 1961 until the date of his death on 22 November 1963.
The applicant’s service number was the Army’s soldier identification system used prior to the use of the social security number. The prefix “RA” meant the soldier had voluntarily enlisted in the Regular Army as opposed to the prefix “US,” which meant the soldier had been drafted into the Army of the United States.
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. The character of the discharge is commensurate with the applicant’s overall record of military service. In 1967, the applicant admitted that he deliberately caused his discipline infractions so he would be discharged. Even though his primary language may have been German, he knew what the standards of military discipline were.
3. If the above statement concerning President Kennedy is insufficient for the applicant’s purposes, recommend he visit the American consulate for further help.
4. If the applicant is still having passport, visa or citizenship problems, recommend he contact the State Department as the appropriate agency to resolve these problems.
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
CMF_____ IEW_____ MKP_____ DENY APPLICATION
Loren G. Harrell
Director
ARMY | BCMR | CY1997 | 9709612C070209
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 considered the...
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.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002076185C070215
The applicant requests, in effect, that the reason for his discharge be changed and that his DD Form 214 (Report of Separation) be corrected by changing his last duty assignment and by listing his secondary military occupational specialty (MOS), accrued leave, and security clearance and awards. The applicant states, in effect, that although he is grateful that the Army Discharge Review Board changed his discharge to honorable, he believes that the reason (unsuitability) used to discharge...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2004 | 20040001226C070208
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 29 March 2005 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20040001226 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. Powers | |Member | The Board considered the following evidence: Exhibit A - Application for correction of military records. Melvin H. Meyer ______________________ CHAIRPERSON INDEX |CASE ID |AR2004000126 | |SUFFIX |...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140016138
The applicant requests that his general discharge be upgraded to a fully honorable discharge. Accordingly, he was discharged under honorable conditions on 14 August 1963 under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-209 for unsuitability based on a character and behavior disorder (Separation Program Number 264). As a result, the Board recommends that all Department of the Army records of the individual concerned be corrected by: a. issuing him an Honorable Discharge Certificate, dated 14...
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 | CY2011 | 20110023464
On 24 April 1965, the applicant's company commander recommended he be discharged under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-209 (Personnel Separations - Discharge - Unsuitability). The evidence of record shows the applicant's separation under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-209 for unsuitability was administratively correct, all requirements of law and regulations were met, the rights of the applicant were fully protected throughout the separation process, and the applicant was...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090016715
IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 25 February 2010 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20090016715 THE BOARD CONSIDERED THE FOLLOWING EVIDENCE: 1. THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE: 1. The applicant requests that his general discharge be upgraded to a fully honorable discharge.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090007358
The ADRB case report also confirms that on 3 August 1964, the unit commander initiated action to discharge the applicant from active duty under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-209 (Personnel Separations - Discharge -Unsuitability), by reason of unsuitability (apathy, defective attitude, and inability to expend effort constructively). However, the Brotzman Memorandum requires that the revised provisions of Army Regulation 635-200 be applied retroactively when reviewing applications for...