| Mr. Carl W. S. Chun | Director | |
| Ms. Joyce A. Wright | Analyst |
| Ms. Celia L. Adolphi | Chairperson | |
| Mr. Harry B. Oberg | Member | |
| Mr. Arthur A. Omartian | Member |
APPLICANT REQUESTS: That his undesirable discharge be upgraded to a general discharge.
APPLICANT STATES: In effect, that he was denied leave to see his mother, that his court-martial was too harsh, and that he had a low education level and financial problems. In support of his application, he submits a copy of his DD Form 214 (Report of Transfer or Discharge).
EVIDENCE OF RECORD: The applicant's military records show he enlisted
on 26 January 1953, and continued to serve until he was honorably discharged on 27 July 1953, in order to reenlist. He reenlisted on 28 July 1953, and continued to serve until he was honorably discharged on 27 July 1959. He reenlisted on 28 July 1959.
He was convicted by one summary and two special courts-martial of failure
to go to his prescribed place of duty, of being AWOL from 16 April to 25 May 1963 (39 days), and from 24 July to 18 August 1963 (26 days). His sentences consisted of reduction to the pay grades of E-4, E-3, and E-1, restriction, and confinement at hard labor for 3 months.
On 8 July 1963, the applicant’s commander submitted a recommendation to separate the applicant from the service under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-208, for unfitness. He cited as the basis for his recommendation the applicant’s attitude, AWOL offenses, and disciplinary record. After consulting with counsel, the applicant waived his rights and elected not to submit a statement in his own behalf.
The applicant underwent a psychiatric evaluation on 20 September 1963,
which diagnosed him as having a passive aggressive reaction, chronic, severe, manifested by obstruction, passive resistance, and repeated AWOL. The psychiatrist determined that he could distinguish right from wrong, possessed
the mental capacity to participate in administrative or judicial proceedings, and that the applicant had no disqualifying mental defects sufficient to warrant disposition through medical channels.
The applicant underwent a separation medical examination on 24 September 1963, and was found qualified for separation.
On 5 October 1963, the appropriate authority approved the recommendation
for discharge and directed that he be furnished an Undesirable Discharge Certificate. The applicant was discharged on 30 October 1963. He had a total
of 10 years, 4 months, and 24 days of creditable service and had 133 days of lost time due to AWOL and confinement.
There is no evidence that the applicant applied to the Army Discharge Review Board for an upgrade of his discharge within its 15-year statute of limitations.
Army Regulation 635-208, then in effect, set forth the policy for administrative separation for unfitness (misconduct). Action to separate an individual was to be taken when, in the judgement of the commander, it was clearly established that rehabilitation was impractical or was unlikely to produce a satisfactory soldier. When separation for unfitness was warranted, an undesirable discharge was normally issued.
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 Board notes the applicant’s contentions; however, there is no evidence in the available records, and the applicant has provided no evidence, to support his contentions or to show that his discharge was unjust and should be upgraded.
His education level and financial problems are not viewed as mitigating factors in his AWOL and subsequent discharge.
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 type of separation directed and the reasons for that separation were appropriate considering all of the available facts of the case.
4. 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.
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
__ca____ ___ho___ __ao____ DENY APPLICATION
| CASE ID | AR2001059210 |
| SUFFIX | |
| RECON | |
| DATE BOARDED | 20011030 |
| TYPE OF DISCHARGE | UOTHC |
| DATE OF DISCHARGE | 19631030 |
| DISCHARGE AUTHORITY | AR 635-208 |
| DISCHARGE REASON | |
| BOARD DECISION | DENY |
| REVIEW AUTHORITY | |
| ISSUES 1. 189 | |
| 2. | |
| 3. | |
| 4. | |
| 5. | |
| 6. |
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 | CY2002 | 2002067566C070402
APPLICANT REQUESTS: That his undesirable discharge be upgraded to a general discharge. In this letter, the applicant was informed that he could submit a request for an upgrade of his discharge to the Army Discharge Review Board in accordance with Army Regulation 15-180. However, records show the applicant signed a letter during his last duty assignment at Fort Hood, Texas, acknowledging that he could submit a request for an upgrade of his discharge to the Army Discharge Review Board.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2005 | 20050003773C070206
On 27 November 1963, 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 29 November 1963, 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 | CY2001 | 2001052894C070420
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 14 October 1981, the...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2006 | 20060004195C070205
Thomas Ray | |Member | The Board considered the following evidence: Exhibit A - Application for correction of military records. The applicant requests that his undesirable discharge be upgraded to honorable. There is no evidence in the available records to show that he ever applied to the Army Discharge Review Board for an upgrade of his discharge within that board’s 15-year statute of limitations.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2006 | 20060001401C070205
On 13 May 1964, the applicant’s commander submitted a recommendation to discharge the applicant from the service under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-208 for unfitness. The U.S. Court of Appeals, observing that applicants to the Army Discharge Review Board (ADRB) are by statute allowed 15 years to apply there, and that this Board's exhaustion requirement (Army Regulation 15-185, paragraph 2-8), effectively shortens that filing period, has determined that the 3 year limit on filing to...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2001 | 2001061182C070421
On 25 January 1961, while the applicant was confined at the Special Processing Detachment, he underwent a mental status evaluation by professionally trained personnel and was determined to be suffering from a passive aggressive reaction that existed prior to service. On 2 March 1961, the applicant was discharged for unfitness under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-208, with a UD. In light of his good post-service conduct, and considering the nature of his indisciplines while on active...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2007 | 20070006779
The applicant went AWOL and his commanding officer put him in for the under other than honorable conditions discharge. When authorized, it is issued to a Soldier whose military record is satisfactory but not sufficiently meritorious to warrant an honorable discharge. The applicant's records show that he was convicted by a general court-martial and a special court-martial.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140013850
An AE Form 3133 (Unit Commander's Report for Psychiatric Examination), dated 28 March 1963, was initiated by his commander for the purpose of an evaluation under Army Regulation 635-208 (Personnel Separations - Discharge - Unfitness) for consideration for separation from the service. The psychiatrist's recommendation was separation from the service under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-208. Therefore, the Board determined that the overall merits of this case are insufficient as a...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100029943
Army Regulation 15-185 sets forth procedures for processing requests for correction of military records. The applicant has presented a new argument concerning the medical diagnosis he received at the time of his separation which is new evidence that warrants consideration by the Board. Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 3-7b, provides that a general discharge is a separation from the Army under honorable conditions.