| Mr. Carl W. S. Chun | Director | |
| Mr. Michael L. Engle | Analyst |
| Ms. Margaret K. Patterson | Chairperson | |
| Mr. Thomas B. Redfern, III | Member | |
| Ms. Regan K. Smith | Member |
APPLICANT REQUESTS: In effect, that his under honorable conditions discharge be upgraded to honorable.
APPLICANT STATES: In effect, that he was discharged for medical reasons and not for disciplinary actions.
EVIDENCE OF RECORD: The applicant's military records show:
He was inducted into the Army on 9 May 1968 for 2 years and was assigned to Fort Lewis, Washington, for basic combat training.
The applicant was absent without leave (AWOL) on 4 different occasions and accumulated over 223 days of lost time due to AWOL and confinement.
The applicant was twice convicted by special court-martial for AWOL. His sentences included forfeitures and confinements at hard labor.
On 15 April 1969, the applicant’s commander initiated separation action under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-212 for unsuitability. The commander cited as justification his extensive lost time and record of punishment. The applicant waived consideration of his case by a board of officers, and elected not to make a statement in his own behalf.
On 16 April 1969, the applicant underwent a psychiatric evaluation. He was diagnosed as having a paranoid personality, chronic, moderate, manifested by paranoid feelings. The psychiatrist presumed that the longstanding character and behavior disorder would tend to exist permanently and recommended that the applicant be administratively separated.
On 17 April 1969, the appropriate authority approved the recommendation for discharge and directed that he be issued a General Discharge Certificate.
Accordingly, he was discharged under honorable conditions on 21 April 1969, under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-212 for unsuitability. He had completed 1 month and 5 days of creditable active service
There is no evidence that the applicant applied to the Army Discharge Review Board for upgrade of his discharge within its 15-year statute of limitations.
Army Regulation 635-200 was revised on 1 December 1976, following settlement of a civil suit. Thereafter, the type of discharge and the character of service was to be determined solely by the individual’s military record during the current enlistment. Further, any separation for unsuitability, based upon personality disorder must include a diagnosis of a personality disorder made by a physician trained in psychiatry. In connection with these changes, a Department of the Army Memorandum dated 14 January 1977, and better known as the Brotzman Memorandum, was promulgated. It required retroactive application of revised policies, attitudes and changes in reviewing applications for upgrades of discharges based upon personality disorders. A second memorandum, dated 8 February 1978, and better known as the Nelson Memorandum, expanded the review policy and specified that the presence of a personality disorder diagnosis would justify upgrade of a discharge to fully honorable except in cases where there are “clear and demonstrable reasons” why a fully honorable discharge should not be given. Conviction by a general court-martial or by more than one special court-martial was determined to be “clear and demonstrable reasons” which would justify a less than fully honorable.
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. The applicant’s administrative separation was accomplished in compliance with applicable regulations with no indication of procedural errors that would tend to jeopardize his rights.
2. The type of discharge directed and the reason therefor were appropriate considering all of the facts of the case.
3. Even though the applicant was diagnosed with a personality disorder, it is not sufficient to overcome the applicant’s misconduct.
4. 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
__MKP _ __TBR __ __RKS__ DENY APPLICATION
| CASE ID | AR2001057010 |
| SUFFIX | |
| RECON | YYYYMMDD |
| DATE BOARDED | 2001/08/07 |
| TYPE OF DISCHARGE | GD |
| DATE OF DISCHARGE | 19690421 |
| DISCHARGE AUTHORITY | AR635-212 |
| DISCHARGE REASON | |
| BOARD DECISION | DENY |
| REVIEW AUTHORITY | |
| ISSUES 1. | A40.00 |
| 2. | |
| 3. | |
| 4. | |
| 5. | |
| 6. |
ARMY | BCMR | CY2007 | 20070012668
On 15 July 1969, the applicant consulted with counsel, and elected to waive consideration of his case by a board of officers; waive appearance before a board of officers; to not to make a statement in his own behalf; and to waive representation by counsel. There is no indication that the applicant applied to the Army Discharge Review Board for an upgrade of his discharge within its 15-year statue of limitations. As a result, the Board recommends that all Department of the Army records of...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2015 | 20150003138
On 22 September 1969, the separation authority approved the applicant's discharge under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-212 by reason of unfitness and directed the issuance of an Undesirable Discharge Certificate. He was discharged for unsuitability due to this character and behavior disorder with an under conditions other than honorable discharge. As a result, the Board recommends that all Department of the Army records of the individual concerned be corrected by: a. issuing the...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2001 | 2001059110C070421
There is no indication in the available records to show that the applicant applied to the Army Discharge Review Board for an upgrade of his discharge within that board’s 15-year statute of limitations. It required retroactive application of revised policies, attitudes and changes in reviewing applications for upgrades of discharges based on personality disorders. That all of the Department of the Army records related to this case be corrected by showing that the individual concerned was...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002066329C070402
The psychiatrist cleared the applicant for any administrative action and recommended separation under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-212. When separation for unsuitability was warranted an honorable or general discharge was issued as determined by the separation authority based upon the individual's entire record. That all of the Department of the Army records related to this case be corrected by showing that the individual concerned was separated from the service with an Honorable...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140017389
Application for correction of military records (with supporting documents provided, if any). On 9 January 1970, the applicant was discharged under other than honorable conditions (Undesirable Discharge) under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-212, for unfitness due to his individual involvement in frequent incidents of a discreditable nature with civil or military authorities. It required retroactive application of revised policies, attitudes and changes in reviewing applications for...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002076789C070215
On 18 September 1968, the applicant’s commander submitted a request to have the applicant rehabilitatively transferred to another unit. The applicant’s commander initiated a recommendation to discharge the applicant from the service for unsuitability due to a character and behavior disorder, under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-212, on 30 April 1969. That all of the Department of the Army records related to this case be corrected by showing that the individual concerned was...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2013 | 20130018552
On 28 December 1967, the separation authority directed the applicant be discharged under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-212 with issuance of a General Discharge Certificate. His service record does not indicate he applied to the Army Discharge Review Board for an upgrade of his discharge within its 15-year statute of limitations. A second memorandum, dated 8 February 1978, and better known as the Nelson Memorandum, expanded the review policy and specified that the presence of a...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002067588C070402
Accordingly, the applicant was discharged under honorable conditions (a general discharge) on 19 August 1969 under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-212 for unsuitability due to character and behavior disorders. On 6 January 1971 and on 16 June 1980, the Army Discharge Review Board denied the applicant’s requests for a discharge upgrade to honorable. That the Department issue to her an Honorable Discharge Certificate, dated 19 August 1969, in lieu of the general discharge of the same...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090000085
Accordingly, the applicant was discharged on 6 April 1970 with a general discharge under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-212 for unsuitability due to character and behavior disorder. In view of the change, the general discharge issued to the applicant at the time of his separation is inconsistent with the standards for discharge for unsuitability, character and behavior disorder (now known as personality disorder) which subsequently became effective. Since these new standards...
ARMY | BCMR | CY1996 | 9608779C070209
Accordingly, he was discharged under honorable conditions on 26 October 1970 under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-212 for unsuitability due to a character and behavior disorder. It required retroactive application of revised policies, attitudes and changes in reviewing applications for upgrade of discharges based on personality disorders. That all of the Department of the Army records related to this case be corrected by showing that the individual concerned was separated from the...