| Mr. Carl W. S. Chun | Director | |
| Ms. Joyce A. Hall | Analyst |
| Mr. Ted S. Kanamine | Chairperson | ||
| Mr. John T. Meixell | Member | ||
| Mr. Harry B. Oberg | Member |
APPLICANT REQUESTS: In effect, that his discharge under honorable conditions be upgraded to honorable.
APPLICANT STATES: No contentions submitted.
EVIDENCE OF RECORD: The applicant's military records show:
On 30 July 1963, the applicant enlisted in the Regular Army for 3 years. He completed the required training and was awarded military occupational specialty
11B10 (Light Weapons Infantryman). The highest pay grade he achieved is pay grade E-2.
On or about 12 December 1963, the applicant arrived at Headquarters and Headquarters Company, 2nd Battalion, 22nd Infantry, 4th Infantry Division, Fort Lewis, Washington for duty.
On 21 January 1965, the applicant was convicted by a special court-martial of being absent without leave (AWOL) from 13 December 1963 to 15 December 1964. He was sentenced to confinement at hard labor (CHL) for 6 months, a reduction to pay grade E-1 and a forfeiture of $55.00 pay per month for 6 months.
On 27 January 1965, the sentence was approved and was duly executed.
He was confined to the U.S. Army Armor Center Stockade, Fort Knox, Kentucky.
On 5 March 1965, the unexecuted portion of the confinement was suspended.
On or about 20 March 1965, the applicant departed for assignment in Germany.
He was assigned to Company B, 1st Battalion, 48th Infantry, 3rd Armored Division
(Spearhead).
On 29 June 1965, the applicant was convicted by a summary court-martial of being AWOL from 18 - 20 June 1965. He was sentenced to CHL for 1 month and a forfeiture of $55.00 pay.
On 2 July 1965, the commander recommended that the applicant be eliminated from the service under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-208. The commander’s recommendation was based on the applicant’s frequent incidents of discreditable nature to the military service.
The applicant underwent a psychiatric evaluation on 16 July 1965, which diagnosed him as having an immature personality. The applicant was cleared psychiatrically for any administrative action deemed appropriate by his command. However, in view of the applicant’s extreme immaturity and limited intelligence the psychiatrist recommended that the applicant be discharged under Army Regulation 635-209 with a GD.
On 19 July 1965, the applicant underwent a medical examination and was found qualified for separation.
On 2 September 1965, Headquarters, 3rd Armored Division (Spearhead), Office of the Staff Judge Advocate concurred with the recommendation of the psychiatrist to discharge the applicant in accordance with Army Regulation 635-209, for unsuitability.
On 3 September 1965, the appropriate authority approved the recommendation to discharge the applicant under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-209, for unsuitability and directed the issuance of a General Discharge Certificate.
On 14 September 1965, the applicant was discharged, in pay grade E-1, under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-209. He had completed 9 months and
20 days of creditable active service and had 465 days of lost time.
Army Regulation 635-208, then in effect, set forth the policy for administrative separation for unfitness (misconduct). Action to separate and individual was to be taken when, in the judgment of the commander, it was clearly established that rehabilitation was impractical or was unlikely to produce a satisfactory soldier. When separation for unfitness was warranted, an undesirable discharge was normally issued.
Army Regulation 635-209 set forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel for unsuitability. That regulation provided, in pertinent part, that a member with a character or behavior disorder, disorder of intelligence, or
Transient personality disorder due to acute or special stress and was unlikely to develop sufficiently to participate in further military training and or become a satisfactory soldier, would be discharged for unsuitability.
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. 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
__TSK__ __JTM__ __HBO___ DENY APPLICATION
| CASE ID | AR2002071354 |
| SUFFIX | |
| RECON | YYYYMMDD |
| DATE BOARDED | 2002/07/11 |
| 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. | 144.0000 |
| 2. | |
| 3. | |
| 4. | |
| 5. | |
| 6. |
ARMY | BCMR | CY1995 | 9508100C070209
APPLICANT REQUESTS: That his general discharge be corrected to an honorable medical disability retirement. That recommendation was approved and the applicant was issued a General Discharge Certificate for unsuitability on 15 March 1965 under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-209. The application is dated 16 March 1995 and the applicant has not explained or otherwise satisfactorily demonstrated by competent evidence that it would be in the interest of justice to excuse the failure to...
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 | 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 | CY2001 | 2001057502C070420
His First Sergeant told him that if he took the Article 15 the First Sergeant would give him back his rank in about a month. The applicant was not eligible for a medical discharge under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-40 as there was no evidence he could not perform his military duties. A “209” discharge was not a medical discharge; it, too, was an administrative discharge although for unsuitability rather than unfitness.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2001 | 2001064447C070421
On 26 February 1965, the applicant was discharged in pay grade E-1, under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-208 for unfitness with a discharge UOTHC. However, at the time of the discharge a discharge UOTHC was normally considered appropriate. Carl W. S. Chun Director, Army Board for Correction of Military RecordsCASE IDAR2001064447SUFFIXRECONYYYYMMDDDATE BOARDED2002/06/11TYPE OF DISCHARGE(UOTHC)DATE OF DISCHARGE1965/02/26DISCHARGE AUTHORITYAR635-208 .
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 | CY2013 | 20130005006
The applicant requests upgrade of his general discharge to an honorable discharge. There is no evidence he applied to the Army Discharge Review Board for an upgrade of his discharge within that board's 15-year statute of limitations. The evidence of record confirms the applicant demonstrated he could not or would not meet acceptable standards required of enlisted personnel as evidenced by the NJP he received for absenting himself from his place of duty, his conviction by a special...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080017314
On 20 May 1965, the applicants immediate commander recommended the applicant be eliminated from the Army under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-208 (Personnel Separations Discharge Unfitness). On 26 June 1965, the separation authority approved the applicant's elimination from the Army under the provision of Army Regulation 635-208 and directed he be furnished an Undesirable Discharge Certificate. There is no indication that the applicant petitioned the Army Discharge Review Board...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090015168
The applicant requests correction of his undesirable discharge to unsuitability under Army Regulation 635-209 (Personnel Separations - Discharge - Unsuitability) or upgrade to general under honorable conditions. The applicant states his discharge should be upgraded because he served 2 years and 4 months of honorable service [before he reenlisted] and a total of 5 years, 4 months, and 24 days. A Soldier would be separated for unfitness when it had been determined that his or her record was...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080002855
The battalion commander stated that in an attempt to rehabilitate the applicant, he was transferred to another company on 3 October 1960. Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 3-7b, provides that a general discharge is a separation from the Army under honorable conditions. Counsel contended that the applicant should have been discharged under Army Regulation 635-209 for unsuitability.