| Mr. Carl W. S. Chun | Director | |
| Mrs. Nancy Amos | Analyst |
| Mr. Walter T. Morrison | Chairperson | |
| Mr. Joe R. Schroeder | Member | |
| Mr. Ronald E. Blakely | Member |
APPLICANT REQUESTS: That his discharge under other than honorable conditions (UOTHC) be upgraded to a general discharge under honorable conditions or that his discharge be changed to a hardship discharge.
APPLICANT STATES: That he was 18 years old and had just gotten married in August 1960. His wife was pregnant, very sick and staying with his parents. There was no heat or air conditioning in the room she was staying in. He felt like he had to be with her. He could not see past his own hardship. He never stopped regretting his poor judgment. He provides his Report of Transfer or Discharge, DD Form 214, and two letters dated 8 March 2001 and 13 March 2001 from his neurosurgeon describing his current medical problems as supporting evidence.
EVIDENCE OF RECORD: The applicant's military records show:
He was born on 14 October 1941. He enlisted in the Regular Army on 29 July 1959. He completed basic combat training and advanced individual training and was awarded military occupational specialty 152.10 (Field Artillery Operator and Intelligence Assistant).
On 27 January 1960, the applicant was convicted by a special court-martial of being absent without leave (AWOL) from 2 to 31 December 1959. He was sentenced to confinement at hard labor for 6 months, suspended, to forfeit $50.00 pay for 6 months, and to be reduced to the lowest enlisted grade.
On 7 December 1960, the applicant received a psychiatric evaluation. He was found to be able to distinguish right from wrong and to adhere to the right and to have the capacity to understand and participate in any board proceedings contemplated. During the interview by the social work technician, the applicant indicated that he departed AWOL 24 August 1960 out of disgust. He wanted out so he could “have a future of…own, support…wife, and get a job and a place of …own.” He “got fed up with everything” and he “wanted to get out of the Army.” His wife and parents tried to get him to go back to his unit but “once…had a little bit of freedom …wanted all …could get.” He indicated that he departed AWOL in December 1959 because he did not like the artillery unit he was in.
On 20 December 1960, the applicant was convicted by a special court-martial of being AWOL from 23 August – 27 November 1960. He was sentenced to confinement at hard labor for 6 months, to forfeit $50.00 pay for 6 months, and to be reduced to the lowest enlisted grade.
The applicant’s commander recommended he be discharged under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-208 for unfitness. The applicant waived his right to counsel, waived his right to have his case heard by a board of officers, and elected not to submit a statement in his own behalf.
The applicant completed a separation physical and was found qualified for separation.
On 20 March 1961, the appropriate authority approved the recommendation and directed the applicant receive an Undesirable Discharge Certificate.
On 30 March 1961, the applicant was discharged, in pay grade E-1, under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-208 for unfitness with an undesirable, discharge UOTHC. He had completed 11 months and 24 days of creditable active service and had 248 days of lost time.
Army Regulation 635-208, in effect at the time, set forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel for unfitness. The regulation provided for the discharge of individuals by reason of unfitness with an undesirable discharge when it had been determined that an individual’s military record was characterized by one of more of the following: frequent incidents of a discreditable nature with civil or military authorities; sexual perversion; drug addiction or the unauthorized use or possession of habit forming narcotic drugs or marijuana; an established pattern for shirking; or an established pattern showing dishonorable failure to pay just debts.
On 6 March 1968, the Army Discharge Review Board (ADRB) denied the applicant’s request for an upgraded discharge.
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 this requirement.
2. The applicant's administrative separation was accomplished in compliance with applicable regulations with no indication of procedural errors which would tend to jeopardize his rights.
3. The Board notes that the applicant’s first period of AWOL occurred before he married. The Board also notes that during his second period of AWOL his wife tried to convince him to return to the Army. While the applicant entered the Army at a young age, the Board is cognizant of the fact that many soldiers enter the Army at 17 or 18 years of age and successfully complete their tours of service.
4. The Board is empathetic with the applicant’s medical problems; however, this is not sufficiently mitigating to warrant an upgrade of his discharge.
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
__wtm___ __jrs___ __reb___ DENY APPLICATION
| CASE ID | AR2001056910 |
| SUFFIX | |
| RECON | |
| DATE BOARDED | 20010814 |
| TYPE OF DISCHARGE | UOTHC |
| DATE OF DISCHARGE | 19610330 |
| DISCHARGE AUTHORITY | AR 635-208 |
| DISCHARGE REASON | A51.00 |
| BOARD DECISION | (DENY) |
| REVIEW AUTHORITY | |
| ISSUES 1. | 110.00 |
| 2. | |
| 3. | |
| 4. | |
| 5. | |
| 6. |
ARMY | BCMR | CY2005 | 20050015643C070206
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 17 August 2006 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20050015643 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. On 4 January 1960, the applicant acknowledged that he had been advised by counsel of the basis for the contemplated action against him under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-208 for unfitness. The separation...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2003 | 2003088024C070403
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. 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:
ARMY | BCMR | CY2004 | 2004106244C070208
On 8 July 1960, the commanding general of the United States Army Ordnance Training Center, APG, denied the applicant’s request for hardship discharge. The applicant’s unit commander initiated action to eliminate the applicant from service under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-208, by reason of unfitness, and recommended that he receive an UD. On 28 November 1960, the applicant was discharged accordingly.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2005 | 20050017155C070206
The unit commander stated as a reason why it would not be considered feasible or appropriate to recommend elimination under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-209 was the applicant’s attitudes of complete disregard for authority and his attitudes toward life in general. On 7 December 1960, the separation authority directed that the applicant be discharged under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-208 with issuance of an Undesirable Discharge Certificate. After review of the evidence...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2003 | 03099539C070212
The Board considered the following evidence: Exhibit A - Application for correction of military records. There are no documents in available records indicating that the applicant's command ever took actions to follow-up on the recommendation to administratively discharge the applicant. Army Regulation 635-208, in effect at the time, provided the authority for discharging enlisted personnel for unfitness.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2005 | 20050004902C070206
On 12 February 1960, the separation authority approved the recommendation for separation under the provisions of Army Regulation 635- 208 for unfitness and directed that the applicant be issued an undesirable discharge. On 18 February 1960, the applicant was discharged with an undesirable discharge and a characterization of service as under other than honorable conditions under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-208 for unfitness due to frequent involvement in incidents of a...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2004 | 2004100798C070208
The unit commander also states the applicant was good at performing those duties that he was assigned most of the time and that there appeared to be nothing wrong with him physically or mentally. The applicant may have performed assigned tasks well most of the time, even so, his personal conduct and attitude rendered both his conduct and efficiency rating unsatisfactory and he received no awards. The Board concludes that the applicant has provided no evidence to establish a basis for the...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002071344C070402
The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein. On 8 November 1960, the commander requested that the applicant go before a board of officers to determined whether the applicant should be discharged prior to expiration of his term of service under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-208 for unfitness. On 9 May 1967, the Army Discharge Review Board denied the applicant’s request for an upgrade.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002069577C070402
The applicant was convicted by a summary court-martial on 23 March 1961 of stealing property (a pair of combat boots) from another service member, of a value of less than $20.00. On 26 November 1973, the Army Discharge Review Board (ADRB) denied the applicant’s request to upgrade his discharge. 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:
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.