| Mr. Carl W. S. Chun | Director | |
| Mrs. Joyce A. Hall | Analyst |
| Ms. Irene N. Wheelwright | Chairperson | |
| Mr. Stanley Kelley | Member | |
| Ms. Karen A. Heinz | Member |
2. The applicant requests, in effect, that his general discharge (GD) be upgraded to an honorable discharge (HD).
3. The applicant states, in effect, that his company commander gave him a general discharge to get him out of the Army early. He believes, that he should have received a medical discharge. His body weight was 170lbs and in 2 months he went down to 124lbs. He took the discharge because he was afraid and was intimidated by his company commander. He was not in any other trouble.
4. The applicant’s military records show that on 4 March 1970, was inducted in the Regular Army, for 2 years. He completed basic combat training (BCT) and advanced individual training (AIT). He was awarded military occupational specialty 76A10 (Supply Man).
5. On 9 June 1970, while assigned to a unit at Fort Ord, CA., the applicant accepted nonjudicial punishment under Article 15, Uniform Code of Military Justice, for being absent without leave from 6 to 8 June 1970. His imposed punishment was a forfeiture of $30.00 pay per month for 2 months (suspended for 2 months), 20 days restriction and extra duty.
6. The applicant arrived in the Republic of Vietnam on or about 28 August
1970. On 28 September 1970, the applicant was referred to the psychiatric clinic by his company commander for evaluation. The applicant was diagnosed as having an immature personality. The Psychiatrist stated, in effect, that the applicant’s judgment was impaired and that his insight was lacking. He further stated, in effect, that the diagnosis of immature personality represents a character and behavior disorder. 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.
7. The applicant’s medical file is not available. The applicant records does not indicate the reason why he was referred to a psychiatric clinic. His record also indicates his conduct and efficiency ratings as excellent during his BCT and AIT.
8. 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. The commander’s recommendation was based on the applicant’s character and behavior disorders. The applicant was advised by legal counsel of the basis for the contemplated separation action and the rights available to him. He waived his right to consideration of his case by a board of officers, waived personal appearance before a board of officers, elected not to make a statement on his behalf and waived representation by counsel.
9. On 4 October 1970, the appropriate authority approved the recommendation, waived rehabilitative requirements and directed the issuance of a discharge under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-212 for unsuitability with a General
Discharge Certificate. The applicant departed the RVN on or about 12 October
1970.
10. On 12 October 1970, the applicant was discharged in pay grade E-1, under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-212 for unsuitability with a discharge under honorable conditions. He had completed 7 months and 9 days of creditable active service and he had 2 days of lost time.
11. Army Regulation 635-212, in effect at the time set forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel. That regulation provided in pertinent part, that commanders would separate a member when, in the commander’s judgment, 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.
12. The applicant never applied to the Army Discharge Review Board for an upgrade of his discharge within that board’s 15-year statute of limitations.
CONCLUSIONS:
1. The applicant’s administrative separation on 12 October 1970, was accomplished in accordance with regulations then in effect.
2. The evidence of record shows that the applicant received a NJP before arriving in the RVN. His record also shows that his conduct and efficiency
rating as excellent. In fact, the applicant’s company commander states in his recommendation for separation that the applicant had no previous convictions by court-martial or no prior NJPs. His recommendation for separation under the provision of Army Regulation 635-212 was based solely on the recommendation of the Staff Psychiatrist.
3. The applicant was discharged because of his unsuitability for military service due to the diagnosis of immature personality which represents a character and behavior disorder and not for misconduct.
4. At the time of his separation the regulation in effect provided that the appropriate authority could approve issuance of a GD or an HD.
5. The Board believes that the discharge under honorable conditions was too harsh given the facts of the case. The Board also believes that it would be fair and just to upgrade the applicant’s discharge to an HD.
6. In view of the foregoing findings and conclusions, it would be appropriate to correct the applicant’s records as recommended below.
RECOMMENDATION:
1. 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 Discharge Certificate on 12 October 1970.
2. That the Department of the Army issue to him an Honorable Discharge Certificate from the Army of the United States, dated 12 October 1970, in lieu of the general discharge of the same date now held by him.
BOARD VOTE:
__inw___ __sk____ __kah___ GRANT AS STATED IN RECOMMENDATION
________ ________ ________ GRANT FORMAL HEARING
________ ________ ________ DENY APPLICATION
Irene N. Wheelwright
______________________
CHAIRPERSON
| CASE ID | AR2001060907 |
| SUFFIX | |
| RECON | |
| DATE BOARDED | 20011115 |
| TYPE OF DISCHARGE | GD |
| DATE OF DISCHARGE | 19701012 |
| DISCHARGE AUTHORITY | AR 635-212 |
| DISCHARGE REASON | |
| BOARD DECISION | GRANT |
| REVIEW AUTHORITY | |
| ISSUES 1. | 144.4000 |
| 2. | |
| 3. | |
| 4. | |
| 5. | |
| 6. |
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002069958C070402
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 the application was filed within the time established by statute, and if not, whether it would be in the interest of justice to waive the failure to timely file. On 24 November 1971, the applicant was separated with a GD. The applicant has not presented and the records do not contain sufficient justification to...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100017780
The applicant requests, in effect, that his undesirable discharge (UD) which was upgraded to a general discharge (GD), under the Department of Defense (DOD) Special Discharge Review Program (SDRP), be upgraded to honorable. A memorandum, dated 21 October 1971, Subject: Elimination Proceedings under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-212, shows that a board of officers was directed to investigate his case to determine if he should be discharged from the service. He applied to the Army...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2005 | 20050007533C070206
Ronald Grant | |Member | The Board considered the following evidence: Exhibit A - Application for correction of military records. A review of his records shows that he reviewed his DA Form 20 on 16 May 1970 and the orders awarding him MOS 64A (vehicle driver) are present in his records. However, he has failed to show through the evidence submitted or the evidence of record that his DA Form 20 incorrectly reflects the duty positions he was assigned to while in Vietnam.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002077641C070215
The applicant requests, in an undated letter received on 1 July 2002, that the Board reconsider his previous application wherein he asks that his General Discharge (GD) be upgraded to an Honorable Discharge (HD) by reason of medical disability, and that he be provided back pay and allowances -- ostensibly for a disability retirement -- dating to 9 January 1969. Copies of VA (Veterans Administration) medical records from 11 January 1984 and 15 July 1985 showing diagnoses of generalized...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002073097C070403
The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein. The report of medical examination he received prior to entry on active duty shows that he had no medical problems. His discharge examination shows that he had conditions warranting a medical discharge.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2013 | 20130012346
The applicant requests an upgrade of his discharge, from an under honorable conditions (general) discharge to an honorable discharge. It now appears his overall service record and diagnosed character and behavior disorder (now known as personality disorder) warrant upgrading his discharge to fully honorable, as directed by the above-referenced Army memoranda. As a result, the Board recommends that all Department of the Army records of the individual concerned be corrected by: a. showing...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002069732C070402
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 the application was filed within the time established by statute, and if not, whether it would be in the interest of justice to waive the failure to timely file. On 7 January 1971, the applicant again left his unit in an AWOL status until 11 April 1971. The applicant has not presented and the records do not contain...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2005 | 20050000989C070206
On 17 October 1969, the applicants unit commander recommended the applicants separation under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-212, by reason of unsuitability (character and behavior disorder). The evidence of record confirms the applicant was separated under unsuitability (character and behavior disorder) provisions of the regulation in effect at the time. As a result, the Board recommends that all Department of the Army records of the individual concerned be corrected by showing...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2005 | 20050000989C070206
On 17 October 1969, the applicant’s unit commander recommended the applicant’s separation under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-212, by reason of unsuitability (character and behavior disorder). Under current regulations, members separated by reason of personality disorder (character and behavior disorder) must be issued an HD unless they have been convicted by a general court-martial or more than one SPCM. As a result, the Board recommends that all Department of the Army records of...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2003 | 2003083412C070212
On 6 May 1970, the applicant’s unit commander initiated action to separate him under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-212, for unsuitability with a general discharge, under honorable conditions. On 16 June 1970, the applicant was separated with an GD under honorable conditions, under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-212, for unsuitability. DISCUSSION : Considering all the evidence, allegations, and information presented by the applicant, together with the evidence of record,...