| Mr. Carl W. S. Chun | Director | |
| Ms. Stephanie Thompkins | Analyst |
| Mr. Arthur A. Omartian | Chairperson | |
| Mr. Roger W. Able | Member | |
| Ms. Karen Y. Fletcher | Member |
APPLICANT REQUESTS: That his general discharge, under honorable conditions be upgraded to honorable.
APPLICANT STATES: That his inability to read and write well caused conflict with his fellow soldiers. He always performed well in field exercises, but got in trouble when he was in the garrison. He also states that he served his country the best he could and believes that service to have been honorable. He submits a copy of his separation document (DD Form 214) in support of his request.
EVIDENCE OF RECORD: The applicant's military records show:
He was inducted into the Army of the United States as a private, pay grade E-1, on 8 November 1961.
He attained the rank of pay grade E-3 on 19 July 1962.
On 3 June 1962, he was punished under Article 15, Uniform Code of Military Justice for failure to repair for bed check. His punishment was 14 days restriction.
On 2 August 1962, he was convicted by summary court-martial (SCM) of absent without leave (AWOL) and violation of a lawful regulation, to wit: “Off Limits.” He was sentenced to reduction to pay grade E-1, hard labor without confinement for 30 days and forfeiture of pay.
On 9 October 1962, he was convicted by SCM of AWOL. He was sentenced to confinement at hard labor for 1 month and forfeiture of pay.
On 6 December 1962, he was convicted by SCM of AWOL and being drunk and disorderly. He was sentenced to confinement at hard labor for 1 month and forfeiture of pay.
On 11 December 1962, he was barred from reenlistment.
The applicant was referred to the psychiatric clinic for evaluation.
A psychiatric evaluation dated 11 December 1962, states the applicant’s military adjustment as reported by the individual and his unit, had been marginal as the applicant had received three summary courts-martial and one Article 15 for AWOL since June 1962. All of these violations had in some way been associated with a chronic drinking problem.
The evaluation found that the applicant was not insane, that he possessed sufficient mental capacity to know the difference between right and wrong, and he was considered mentally responsible for his acts. The applicant was cleared from a psychiatric viewpoint for administrative action as deemed appropriate by his command.
On 9 January 1963, his commander recommended him for elimination under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-209 for unsuitability, emotional immaturity with resort to alcoholism as relief from the demands of Army life.
On 11 January 1963, after declining counsel, the applicant acknowledged his proposed elimination from the service and waived his rights to a hearing before a board of officers. He also declined to submit a statement in his own behalf.
On 11 January 1963, the appropriate separation authority approved the applicant’s separation for unsuitability and directed that a General Discharge Certificate be furnished.
He was separated on 18 January 1963, with a general discharge, under honorable conditions, under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-209. He had a total of 1 year and 18 days net active service. He also had 54 days lost time.
There is no record that the applicant applied to the Army Discharge Review Board for upgrade of his discharge within its 15-year statute of limitations.
Army Regulation 635-209, then in effect, established the policy and provided procedures for prompt elimination of enlisted personnel who were determined to be unsuitable for further military service. It specified that action will be taken to discharge an individual when it is clearly established that it is unlikely the individual will develop sufficiently to participate in further military service and/or become a satisfactory soldier, or the individual’s psychiatric or physical condition is such as not to warrant discharge for disability.
Past and current regulations provide that an honorable discharge is a separation with honor. The honorable characterization is appropriate when the quality of the member's service generally has met the standards of acceptable conduct and performance of duty for Army personnel, or is otherwise so meritorious that any other characterization would be inappropriate.
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 is not entitled to upgrade of his general discharge, under honorable conditions to honorable. He has not shown error, injustice, or inequity for the relief he now requests.
2. His contentions have been noted; however, there is no evidence of record, nor has the applicant provided any, that his discharge was based on an inability to read and write well, or was in error or unjust. His records clearly show that his medical evaluation concluded he possessed sufficient mental capacity to know the difference between right and wrong. His records clearly reflect that it was unlikely he would become a satisfactory soldier and well documented he received proper consideration for this discharge.
3. 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.
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
_ra_____ _kyf___ __rwa___ DENY APPLICATION
| CASE ID | AR2001062664 |
| SUFFIX | |
| RECON | |
| DATE BOARDED | 20020404 |
| TYPE OF DISCHARGE | |
| DATE OF DISCHARGE | |
| DISCHARGE AUTHORITY | |
| DISCHARGE REASON | |
| BOARD DECISION | DENY |
| REVIEW AUTHORITY | |
| ISSUES 1. | A70 |
| 2. | |
| 3. | |
| 4. | |
| 5. | |
| 6. |
ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080008919
The applicant states, in effect, that he was court-martialed and discharged after following direct orders from a non-commissioned officer (NCO). On 15 January 1963, the appropriate separation authority approved the applicants discharge under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-209, and directed the issuance of a General Discharge Certificate. There is no evidence that the applicant applied to the Army Discharge Review Board (ADRB) for an upgrade of his discharge within that board's...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2004 | 20040011266C070208
The applicant requests that his records be corrected by upgrading his discharge. On 23 January 1963, the appropriate separation authority approved the discharge request and directed the issuance of a general discharge. That determination was well within the separation’s authority at that time.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2007 | 20070005424
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 30 August 2007 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20070005424 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 7 August 1962, the separation authority approved the applicants discharge under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-209 by reason of unsuitability and directed the applicant be furnished a General Discharge...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002078051C070215
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. APPLICANT STATES : In effect, that at the time he was discharged under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-209, he was not informed that he was being discharged for unsuitability and did not discover that this...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2003 | 2003090771C070212
The applicant was discharged on 27 August 1963. However, the evidence of record shows that prior to the applicant's discharge in August 1963, competent medical authority determined that he was then medically qualified for separation with a physical profile of 111111. The Board determined that the evidence presented and the merits of this case are insufficient to warrant the relief requested, and therefore, it would not be in the interest of justice to excuse the applicant's failure to...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2001 | 2001057829C070420
The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein. On 11 June 1963, the appropriate separation authority approved the applicant’s separation and directed that the applicant be separated with a general discharge, under honorable conditions, by reason of character and behavior disorder. He was separated on 29 June 1963, with a general discharge, under honorable conditions, under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-209,...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2012 | 20120019033
THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE: 1. Army Regulation 635-208, in effect at the time of the applicant's discharge from active duty, provided procedures and guidance for eliminating enlisted personnel having undesirable habits and traits of character. The separation authority determined that his misconduct warranted his discharge under other than honorable conditions with the issuance of an Undesirable Discharge Certificate.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2007 | 20070014122
After completion of 2 months and 8 days of military service, he was honorably discharged on 20 April 1962 for the purpose of enlistment in the Regular Army. However, the DD Form 214 he was issued at the time of his discharge confirms he was discharged on 1 March 1968 for unfitness, under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-212 and his characterization of service was under conditions other than honorable. On 21 November 1968, the Army Discharge Review Board denied the applicants request...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100000292
The applicant was discharged in pay grade E-1 on 10 July 1964 under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-208 with an undesirable discharge. He has provided no evidence to show that he deserved an honorable or a general discharge at that time of separation or now. _______ _ x _______ ___ CHAIRPERSON I certify that herein is recorded the true and complete record of the proceedings of the Army Board for Correction of Military Records in this case.
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...