| Mr. Carl W. S. Chun | Director | |
| Ms. Deborah L. Brantley | Senior Analyst |
| Ms. Margaret K. Patterson | Chairperson | |
| Mr. Elzey J. Arledge, Jr. | Member | |
| Mr. Richard T. Dunbar | Member |
APPLICANT REQUESTS: That his records be corrected to reflect disability retirement or separation.
APPLICANT STATES: In effect, that he was misdiagnosed with a "mental disorder" and was subsequently diagnosed by a civilian psychiatrist who "has had [him] under treatment since." He states that "due to the original diagnosis" he went "untreated for major depression for 26 years." He submits no evidence in support of his request.
EVIDENCE OF RECORD: The applicant's military records show:
He entered active duty on 19 June 1961. His entrance physical examination indicated he was medically qualified for enlistment. He successfully completed training and by March 1962 had been promoted to pay grade E-3.
On 26 May 1962 the applicant departed AWOL (absent without leave). He was dropped from the rolls of the Army in June 1962 and returned to military control in July 1962. As a result of his AWOL, the applicant was convicted by a special court-martial. His sentence included reduction to pay grade E-2.
On 5 September 1962 the applicant's unit commander requested that the applicant be administratively separated from active duty under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-209. The commander noted that the applicant's conduct and efficiency were unsatisfactory and that it was the opinion of "the Post Neuropsychistrist [sic]" that the applicant be separated "as expeditiously as possible." Records available to the Board did not include the entire separation package, nor was the applicant's mental status evaluation available. The unit commander's 5 September request did note, however, that the statement from the "Medical Officer" and a statement from the service member were included with his request.
The unit commander's request was approved, and on 14 September 1962 the applicant was discharged under honorable conditions.
There were no medical records available to the Board.
Army Regulation 635-209, in effect at the time, set forth the policy and prescribed procedures for eliminating enlisted personnel for unsuitability. Action was to be taken to discharge an individual for unsuitability when, in the commander's opinion, it was clearly established that: the individual was unlikely to develop sufficiently to participate in further military training and/or become a satisfactory soldier or the individual's psychiatric or physical condition was such as to not warrant discharge for disability. Unsuitability included inaptitude, character and behavior disorders, disorders of intelligence and transient personality disorders due to acute or special stress, apathy, defective attitude, and inability to expend effort constructively. Evaluation by a medical officer was required and, when psychiatric indications are involved, the medical officer must be a psychiatrist, if one was available. A general or honorable discharge was considered appropriate.
Title 10, United States Code provides for the physical disability separation of a member who has less than 20 years service and a disability rated at less than 30 percent. It also provides for the physical disability retirement of a member who has at least 20 years of service or a disability rated at least 30 percent.
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 the absence of evidence to the contrary, it is presumed that the applicant's administrative separation was accomplished in accordance with policies and procedures in effect at the time.
2. The Board notes that the applicant has not provided any evidence, and there is no evidence in available records, which indicates he had any medically unfitting disability which required physical disability processing. Therefore, there is no basis for physical disability retirement or separation.
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 that 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
__MKP__ __EJA___ __RTD__ DENY APPLICATION
| CASE ID | AR2002066898 |
| SUFFIX | |
| RECON | YYYYMMDD |
| DATE BOARDED | 20020411 |
| 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. | 108.00 |
| 2. | |
| 3. | |
| 4. | |
| 5. | |
| 6. |
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 | CY2004 | 20040010212C070208
Leonard Hassell | |Member | The Board considered the following evidence: Exhibit A - Application for correction of military records. The applicant requests that his discharge be upgraded to fully honorable by reason of physical disability. Action was to be taken to discharge an individual for unsuitability when, in the commander's opinion, it was clearly established that: the individual was unlikely to develop sufficiently to participate in further military training and/or become a...
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 | CY2010 | 20100025105
On 30 August 1962, the applicant's unit commander notified him that it was his intent to recommend him for separation from military service under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-209 (Personnel Separations Discharge Unsuitability) with issuance of a General Discharge Certificate. His available records are void of any evidence and he has not provided any evidence showing his flat feet were either incurred in or aggravated by his military service. Those members who do not meet...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002073389C070403
The examining psychiatrist noted that the applicant was eligible for separation under Army Regulation 635-209, but was considered cleared psychiatrically for any administrative disposition deemed appropriate by his command. On 2 October 1962 the company commander initiated action to administratively discharge the applicant with a general discharge under Army Regulation 635-209. Thereafter, the type of discharge and the character of service were to be determined solely by the individual's...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080014225
The military psychiatrist further recommended the applicant be separated from the Army. The applicant submitted copies of his chronological record of medical care, dated on miscellaneous dates throughout his military service, that show he underwent a routine hernia operation on 4 June 1962 at Fort Hood, Texas, and that he was discharged to duty after his surgery. In order to justify correction of a military record, the applicant must show, or it must otherwise satisfactorily appear, that...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2001 | 2001060269C070421
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. There is no evidence, and the applicant has not provided any, which indicates that he suffered from any medically disqualifying condition which would have...
ARMY | BCMR | CY1996 | 9606824C070209
He recommended that the applicant be separated from the Army under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-209 for unsuitability. On 22 July 1963 the applicants commanding officer recommended that the applicant be discharged with an undesirable type discharge under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-208 for unfitness. He stated that he was recommending discharge under Army Regulation 635-208 for unfitness instead of Army Regulation 635-209 for unsuitability as recommended by the...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090008697
There is no evidence the applicant applied to the Army Discharge Review Board for upgrade of his discharge within its 15-year statute of limitations. There is no evidence of record, and the applicant provides insufficient evidence, that shows the applicant was found mentally (or physically) unfit for retention in military service during the period of service under review. _______ _ X_______ ___ CHAIRPERSON I certify that herein is recorded the true and complete record of the proceedings of...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080007534
The examiner determined the applicant's condition did not warrant separation from service under the provisions of current medical discharge regulations. The examiner recommended the applicant be separated from the service for unsuitability. The applicant stated that he was not submitting statements in his own behalf and that he waived counsel.