| Mr. Carl W. S. Chun | Director | |
| Mrs. Joyce A. Hall | Analyst |
| Mr. Raymond V. O’Connor, Jr. | Chairperson | |
| Ms. Regan K. Smith | Member | |
| Mr. Donald P. Hupman, Jr. | Member |
APPLICANT REQUESTS: In effect, that his discharge under honorable conditions discharge be corrected to a medical discharge.
APPLICANT STATES: In effect, that he was told by his counsel that he could benefit from a medical discharge. He should have received a medical discharged because of his height (6’ 8’’).
EVIDENCE OF RECORD: The applicant's military records show:
On 27 August 1969, the applicant was inducted into the Army of the United States for 2 years. He completed the required training and was awarded military specialty 70A10 (Clerk).
On 12 June 1970, at Fort Lewis, Washington, the applicant was convicted by a special court-martial of two specifications of being absent without leave (AWOL) from 3 to 18 April 1970 and from 23 to 30 April 1970, for two specifications of failing to repair and for breaking restriction. He was sentenced to a forfeiture of $83.00 pay per month for 2 months and confinement at hard labor for 90 days (suspended for 3 months).
On 24 June 1970, the commander notified the applicant that he was being recommended for discharge under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-212 for unsuitability. The commander’s recommendation was based on the applicant’s numerous occasions of failure to repair, for prolonged AWOLs and for breaking restriction. He also displayed low motivation and dereliction in the performance of duty.
On 2 July 1970, a psychiatric evaluation diagnosed the applicant as having a passive-aggressive personality disorder. There was no evidence of any mental disease, defect, or derangement sufficient to warrant medical disposition under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-40. He was found to be mentally able to distinguish right from wrong, to adhere to the right, and had the mental capacity to understand and participate in board and other legal proceedings. The applicant’s medical file is not available.
On 21 July 1970, the applicant was advised of his rights by counsel. He waived his rights for consideration of his case by a board of officer, waived personal appearance before a board of officers, elected not to make a statement on his behalf, and waived representation by counsel.
On 28 July 1970, the appropriate authority approved the recommendation, waived the requirements for counseling and rehabilitation and directed the issuance of a General Discharge Certificate under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-212, for unsuitability.
On 5 August 1970, the applicant was discharged in pay grade E-3 under the provisions of Army Regulations 635-212, for unsuitability with a general discharge. He had completed 9 months and 16 days of creditable active service and had 53 days of lost time.
Army Regulation 635-212, in effect at the time set forth the basic authority for separation of enlisted personnel. That regulation provided in pertinent part, that commanders would separate a member when, in the commander’s judgement, it was clearly established that the member would not develop sufficiently to become a satisfactory soldier. When separation for unsuitability a general or an honorable discharge was normally considered appropriate.
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 that 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 contention that he was too tall for military service is unfounded. There is no evidence that his height would have been a factor in receiving a medical discharge.
3. The applicant’s administrative separation was accomplished in compliance with applicable regulations.
4. Considering the applicant’s court-martial conviction, the characterization of his discharge was appropriate.
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
__rvo___ __rks___ __dph___ DENY APPLICATION
| CASE ID | AR2001058525 |
| SUFFIX | |
| RECON | |
| DATE BOARDED | 20011016 |
| TYPE OF DISCHARGE | GD |
| DATE OF DISCHARGE | 19700805 |
| DISCHARGE AUTHORITY | AR635-212 |
| DISCHARGE REASON | A40.00 |
| BOARD DECISION | DENY |
| REVIEW AUTHORITY | |
| ISSUES 1. | 144.4000 |
| 2. | |
| 3. | |
| 4. | |
| 5. | |
| 6. |
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002069400C070402
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. The evidence of record shows that the applicant mentioned in late 1971 that he was depressed but a psychiatric evaluation at that time determined he was not psychotic and he had a grasp of reality.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2007 | 20070014641
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 20 February 2008 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20070014641 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. The DD Form 214 he was issued shows he had completed 3 months and 17 days of active service that was characterized as under honorable conditions. There is no evidence that the applicant applied to the Army Discharge...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2001 | 2001051849C070420
The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein. These incidents of misconduct clearly diminished the quality of the applicant's service below that meriting a fully honorable discharge. The Board concluded that the applicant’s discharge was appropriate because the quality of his service was not consistent with the Army's standards for acceptable personal conduct and performance of duty by military personnel.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2007 | 20070003821
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 23 August 2007 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20070003821 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 1 December 1970, he was discharged with an undesirable discharge and a characterization of service of under other than honorable conditions after completing 3 years, 10 months, and 24 days of creditable active...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2005 | 20050000386C070206
The applicant requested consideration by a board of officers and to personally appear before that board. The board recommended the applicant be discharged from the service due to unfitness with issuance of an Undesirable Discharge Certificate. Army Regulation 635-200 (Active Duty Enlisted Administrative Separations), paragraph 3-7, provides that an honorable discharge is a separation with honor and entitles the recipient to benefits provided by law.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2004 | 20040007861C070208
He demonstrated no significant mental illness. On 1 February 1972, the applicant’s commander notified him that he was being recommended for separation under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-212, for unsuitability. On 24 February 1972, the applicant was discharged under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-212, by reason of unsuitability with a GD.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2001 | 2001060907C070421
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 2 October 1970, the commander notified the applicant that he was being recommended for discharge under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-212 for unsuitability. 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...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | 20110021544
The applicant requests, in effect, his general discharge be changed to a medical discharge. A general under honorable conditions or an honorable discharge was considered appropriate. In view of the change, the general discharge issued to the applicant at the time of separation is inconsistent with the standards for discharge for unsuitability, character and behavior disorder (now known as personality disorder) which subsequently became effective.
ARMY | BCMR | CY1997 | 9711689
The applicant requests correction of his records to show an honorable discharge; award of the Prisoner of War (POW) Medal, possible award of the Medal of Honor, “return of Purple Heart” and any other awards to which he is entitled; and, in effect, correction of his records to show possible toxic chemical exposure and a disability discharge. There is no evidence the applicant was considered for or recommended for award of the Medal of Honor at the time of his service in Vietnam. There are...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2001 | 2001058467C070421
The Board considered the following evidence: There is no record of punishment. On 2 May 1972, the applicant was discharged in pay grade E-2 under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-212, for unsuitability with a general discharge.