| Mr. Carl W. S. Chun | Director | |
| Mr. Edmund P. Mercanti | Analyst |
| Mr. Fred N. Eichorn | Chairperson | |
| Mr. Thomas A. Pagan | Member | |
| Mr. Harry B. Oberg | Member |
APPLICANT REQUESTS: That his undesirable discharge be upgraded to a general discharge.
APPLICANT STATES: That he was immature when he committed his indiscretions, which is substantiated by psychiatric examinations for which he was the subject while he was on active duty. He explains that he was “lost” when his mother died and thought joining the service would block her memory. However, he was very spoiled and immature, which resulted in his unfortunate actions. He is very sorry for the way he acted, and had unsuccessfully attempted to atone for his behavior by reenlisting. Since his discharge he has been a model citizen, husband, and father of an adopted daughter. He has maintained a good job and has been active in local and state politics.
In support of his application he submits letters from his wife and from many people within his community.
EVIDENCE OF RECORD: The applicant's military records show:
He enlisted in 23 November 1953, and was awarded the military occupational specialty of cook. He was convicted by a special court-martial on 7 September 1954 of being Absent Without Leave (AWOL) from 25 July to 24 August 1954. He was convicted by a Summary Court-Martial on 31 August 1955 of leaving his appointed place of duty. He was convicted by a Special Court-Martial on 6 February 1956 of being AWOL from 9 to 28 January 1956.
On 18 June 1956, the applicant was given a psychiatric evaluation and was diagnosed as having emotional instability reactions, chronic, moderate, manifested by emotional liability, impulsive acts, repeated disciplinary infractions and emotional immaturity. The diagnosing psychiatrist attested to the mental competency of the applicant and recommended that he be separated from the Army as unfit for future military duty.
On 5 July 1956, a board of officers was convened. That board recommended that the applicant be separated due to unfitness and that he be given an undesirable discharge. That recommendation was approved and the applicant was discharged under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-208 for unfitness on 9 August 1956 and issued an Undesirable Discharge Certificate. He had 2 years, 3 months and 24 days of creditable service and 143 days of lost time.
Army Regulation 635-208, then in effect, set forth the policy and procedures for separation of enlisted personnel for unfitness. Unfitness included repeated petty offenses/frequent incidents of a discreditable nature with military or civilian authorities, sexual perversion, drug abuse, use of marijuana, and an established pattern of dishonorable failure to pay just debts. Action to separate an individual was to be taken when, in the judgment of the commander, rehabilitation was impractical or was unlikely to produce a satisfactory soldier. When separation for unfitness was warranted an undesirable discharge was normally considered appropriate.
DISCUSSION: Considering all the evidence, allegations, and information presented by the applicant, together with the evidence of record and applicable law and regulations, it is concluded:
1. The applicant had frequent incidents of a discreditable nature with military authorities, as evidenced by his three court-martial convictions. A board of officers was properly convened and determined that his pattern of indiscipline warranted separation due to unfitness and that his record of service warranted a characterization of service of under other than honorable conditions. There is no error or injustice evident in that scenario.
2. The applicant asks the Board to consider his immaturity as a matter of mitigation. In this regard, the Board must consider that the armed forces enlists soldiers as young as age 17. Despite the youth of these soldiers, the military expects them to comply with lawful orders and regulations. To excuse the applicant’s misconduct based on his immaturity would call into question the honorable and faithful service rendered by the multitude of young soldiers who have worn the uniform throughout the years. It would appear that the applicant would not comply with the Army’s rules and regulations; not that he could not comply with them.
3. The applicant has also asked the Board to upgrade his discharge based on his being a model citizen, husband, and father of an adopted daughter, and for maintaining a good job and being active in local and state politics. In this regard, the Board cannot in good conscience recommend upgrading a properly issued discharge because a person is doing what is normally expected of a good citizen, husband, father and employee. The fact that he is active in politics is also commendable, but insufficient to warrant upgrading his discharge.
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
___fne __ ____hbo _ ___tao __ DENY APPLICATION
| CASE ID | AC2001063580 |
| SUFFIX | |
| RECON | YYYYMMDD |
| DATE BOARDED | 20011006 |
| TYPE OF DISCHARGE | (HD, GD, UOTHC, UD, BCD, DD, UNCHAR) |
| DATE OF DISCHARGE | YYYYMMDD |
| DISCHARGE AUTHORITY | AR . . . . . |
| DISCHARGE REASON | |
| BOARD DECISION | DENY |
| REVIEW AUTHORITY | |
| ISSUES 1. | |
| 2. | |
| 3. | |
| 4. | |
| 5. | |
| 6. |
ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080015241
The applicant's military service records are not available to the Board for review. The applicants available military personnel records contain a DD Form 214 that shows he entered active duty this period on 19 May 1950 and was discharged on 16 January 1958 under other than honorable conditions under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-208. The evidence of record shows that the applicant initially entered active duty on 19 May 1950, was honorably discharged for the purpose of his...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2006 | 20060010876
Exhibit B - Military Personnel Records (including advisory opinion, if any). On 16 July 1956, the Board of Officers recommended that the applicant be discharged from the service under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-208 for unfitness and that he be issued an Undesirable Discharge Certificate. On 26 July 1956, the applicant was discharged accordingly.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002080821C070215
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. 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 | CY2002 | 2002070670C070402
APPLICANT REQUESTS: In effect, that his undesirable discharge (UD) be upgraded. Although he initially waived his right to an administrative separation board, on 13 September 1963, a board of officers convened under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-208 to determine if he should be discharged from the Army because of unfitness. As requested by the applicant, the Board considered his contentions and the letters of support for an upgrade of his discharge.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002070102C070402
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. DETERMINATION : The subject application was not submitted within the time required. The applicant has not presented and the records do not contain sufficient...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2003 | 2003084250C070212
The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein. The Board convened on 24 April 1957 and after hearing testimony from the applicant, whereas he stated that he wanted out of the Army, the board of officers found that he was unfit for further service and recommended that he be discharged under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-208, for unfitness. The applicant's commander submitted a recommendation to discharge him...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2006 | 20060010845
The applicant submitted a letter from a friend who states the applicant worked for his father back in the early 1960's before the applicant started his own transmission service. 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 applicant's records were not available for the Board's review.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2001 | 2001061058C070421
The applicant requests that his undesirable discharge (UD) be upgraded to a fully honorable discharge or that the reason for discharge be changed to "Convenience of the Government." An Army Discharge Review Boards (ADRB) Case Report, dated 19 April 1962, reveals that, on 4 October 1956, the applicant's commander recommended that a board of officers meet to determine his fitness for continued military service under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-208. The Board does not condone the...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-02817
_________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPPRS recommended upgrading the discharge to general (under honorable conditions) due to the lack of documentation to support the reasons leading to the applicant’s discharge, if a search of the FBI file reveals no convictions. We note the recommendation from the Air Force; however, based on the limited documentation pertaining to the reason for his separation, the majority of the Board does not...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2004 | 20040000526C070208
The Board considered the following evidence: Exhibit A - Application for correction of military records. He related that he did not see his father again until he was 11 years old. Army Regulation 635-208, in effect at the time, provided the authority for discharging enlisted personnel for unfitness.