| Mr. Carl W. S. Chun | Director | |
| Mrs. Judy Blanchard-Miller | Analyst |
| Mr. George D. Paxson | Chairperson | |
| Mr. Walter T. Morrison | Member | |
| Mr. Richard T. Dunbar | Member |
APPLICANT REQUESTS: In effect, that his discharge under honorable conditions (GD) be upgraded to an honorable discharge.
APPLICANT STATES: That alcohol caused his discharge.
EVIDENCE OF RECORD: The applicant's military records show:
On 2 November 1960, the applicant reenlisted in the Regular Army for a period of 3 years with 11 years, 1 month and 27 days of prior active service. His military occupational specialty was 141.67 (Field Artillery Crewman). On 15 February 1961, the applicant was promoted to staff sergeant E-6.
On 5 August 1961, the applicant was convicted by a summary court-martial of being absent without leave (AWOL). He was sentenced to a reduction to pay grade E-5. The applicant’s record also indicates that he went AWOL on two more occasions, however, the particulars are missing from his file.
The applicant’s record indicates that he initially was referred to the mental hygiene clinic in connection with his enuresis and excessive alcohol intake in June 1961. However, on 29 August 1961, while being interviewed by a psychiatrist a certain amount of evidence was found that the applicant had been increasingly depressed for approximately one year. The applicant told the psychiatrist about his suicidal thoughts even to the point of planning to injure himself. Because of the possibility of suicide he was admitted into the hospital for observation.
On 22 September 1961, the applicant was discharged from the hospital with a diagnosis of passive-dependency reaction, chronic, moderate to severe, manifested by severe alcohol excess and depressive features. The applicant was found unsuitable for further military service and expeditious separation under Army Regulation 635-209, was strongly recommended.
On 29 September 1961, the commander notified the applicant that he was being recommended for discharge under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-209, for unsuitability, (character and behavior disorders) with a general discharge. The applicant was advised by legal counsel of the basis for the contemplated separation action and the rights available to him. The applicant waived personal appearance, consideration, and representation by counsel before a board of officers. He was afforded the opportunity to submit statements in his own behalf, but declined to do so. The appropriate authority approved the recommendation and directed the issuance of a general discharge.
On 6 November 1961, the applicant was discharged in pay grade E-4, under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-209 for unsuitability with a general discharge. He had completed 11 months and 27 days of creditable active service during this enlistment and 8 days of lost time.
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 635-209, in effect, set forth the basic authority for separation of enlisted personnel for unsuitability. 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 was approved a GD 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 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 discharge proceedings were conducted in accordance with law and regulations applicable at the time. The character of the discharge is commensurate with the applicant’s overall record of military service.
3. Therefore 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
__gdp___ __wtm___ __rtd___ DENY APPLICATION
| CASE ID | AR2001062565 |
| SUFFIX | |
| RECON | |
| DATE BOARDED | 20020124 |
| TYPE OF DISCHARGE | (GD) |
| DATE OF DISCHARGE | 19611106 |
| DISCHARGE AUTHORITY | AR635-209. . . . . |
| DISCHARGE REASON | A40.00 |
| BOARD DECISION | (DENY) |
| REVIEW AUTHORITY | |
| ISSUES 1. | 144.4000 |
| 2. | |
| 3. | |
| 4. | |
| 5. | |
| 6. |
ARMY | BCMR | CY2003 | 2003088778C070403
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. A neuropsychiatric...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2006 | 20060013678
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 8 May 2007 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20060013678 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 15 September 1961, the applicant was discharged with a general discharge under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-209 for unsuitability due to character and behavior disorders. Therefore, the applicant's record of...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100012114
There is no indication the applicant applied to the Army Discharge Review Board for an upgrade of his discharge within that board's 15-year statute of limitations. The applicant contends his records should be corrected to show he was honorably discharged because at the time of his discharge he was under the influence of alcoholism. As a result, the Board recommends that all Department of the Army records of the individual concerned be corrected by: a. issuing the applicant an Honorable...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2004 | 2004102655C070208
Title 10, U.S. Code, Section 1552(b), provides that applications for correction of military records must be filed within 3 years after discovery of the alleged error or injustice. On 21 September 1961, the applicant’s unit commander recommended that a Board of Officers be appointed under the provisions of AR 635-208 to determine if he should be discharged from the service for unfitness. Action was to be taken to discharge an individual for unsuitability when, in the commander's opinion, it...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2005 | 20050018019C070206
On 27 June 1961, the convening authority approved the sentence but suspended the confinement at hard labor for 3 months. 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. The Board determined that the evidence presented does not demonstrate the existence of a probable error or injustice.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | 20110007972
On 10 December 1964, the applicant's commander initiated a request to discharge the applicant for unsuitability under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-209 (Personnel Separations Discharge Unsuitability). He was diagnosed with a character and behavior disorder by a military psychiatrist and he was discharged for unsuitability due to a character and behavior disorder with a general discharge. As a result, the Board recommends that all Department of the Army records of the individual...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2007 | 20070000901
The applicant requests, in effect, correction of his discharge. The applicants military service records contain a DD Form 789 (Unit Punishment Record). The evidence of record shows that the applicant served on active duty less than 18 months.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090010666
The applicant was discharged on 6 December 1961 under honorable conditions for a character and behavior disorder. While the applicant was not a disciplinary problem, his personality disorder prevented him from meeting the standards of acceptable conduct and performance of duty as to warrant a fully honorable discharge as established at the time of his discharge. As a result, the Board recommends that all Department of the Army records of the individual concerned be corrected by: a. showing...
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 | CY2011 | 20110019153
On 10 April 1965, the separation authority approved the applicant's separation under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-209 by reason of unsuitability with issuance of a General Discharge Certificate. The applicants service record is void of evidence which supports his contention he was assaulted by a Motor Pool Sergeant while he was on active duty in 1965. The Nelson Memorandum specified that the presence of a personality disorder (character and behavior disorder at the time)...