| Mr. Carl W. S. Chun | Director | |
| Mr. Joseph A. Adriance | Analyst |
| Mr. Raymond V. O’Connor, Jr. | Chairperson | ||
| Mr. Richard T. Dunbar | Member | ||
| Mr. Kenneth W. Lapin | Member |
APPLICANT REQUESTS: In effect, that his undesirable discharge (UD) be upgraded to an honorable discharge (HD).
APPLICANT STATES: In effect, that his discharge was too harsh for the minor offenses that caused it, which were that he missed bed checks a few times.
EVIDENCE OF RECORD: The applicant's military records show:
On 1 April 1959, he enlisted in the Army for 3 years. He successfully completed basic training at Fort Jackson, South Carolina, and he qualified in and was awarded military occupational specialty (MOS) 131.00 (Tank Crewman).
The applicant’s Service Record (DA Form 24) documents no acts of valor, significant achievement, or service warranting special recognition. However, it does reveal an extensive disciplinary history.
His Unit Punishment Record (DD Form 789) shows that he received unit punishment on the following dates for the offenses indicated: 6 June 1960, for being absent without leave (AWOL); 1 July 1960, for illegal possession of fire crackers; 23 July 1960, for disorderly conduct while on pass; and 16 September 1960, for misconduct.
A Record of Court-Martial Conviction (DA Form 26) on file confirms that the applicant was convicted by a summary court-martial on the following three separate dates for the offenses indicated: 29 October 1959, for stealing one pair of shoes valued at $5.60; 1 April 1960, for AWOL, failure to obey a lawful order, and disorderly in a public place; and 30 April 1960, for AWOL and wrongfully using an official pass with the intent to deceive.
On 21 November 1960, the applicant signed a statement confirming that he had been counseled and advised of the basis for the action of his unit commander recommending that he be discharged prior to his normal expiration of term of service (ETS) under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-208. He further acknowledged that he had been informed of his right to have individual counsel represent him at a hearing, and he waived that right. He also indicated that he elected to waive his right to a hearing by a board of officers, and that he understood that he could be administratively discharged without a hearing as a result of this waiver. Finally, he elected not to submit a statement in his own behalf.
On 1 December 1960, the applicant’s unit commander submitted a request that the applicant be eliminated from service under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-208. The unit commander stated that the reasons for his taking the action were the applicant’s off duty conduct and frequent discreditable civil offenses, his lack of maturity and adjustability, and his belligerent attitude toward all counseling and rehabilitative measures.
On 13 December 1960, the separation authority approved the separation action and directed that the applicant receive an UD, and that he be reduced to the lowest enlisted grade.
On 7 January 1961, the applicant was discharged accordingly. The separation document (DD Form 214) issued to and authenticated by the applicant on the date of his separation confirms that he was separated under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-208, by reason of unfitness. At the time of his separation, he had completed a total of 1 year, 9 months, and 5 days of creditable active military service, and he had accrued a total of 2 days of time lost due to AWOL.
There is no indication that the applicant petitioned the Army Discharge Review Board for an upgrade to his discharge within its 15 year statute of limitations.
Army Regulation 635-208, in effect at the time, set forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel. It provided, in pertinent part, that members involved in frequent incidents of a discreditable nature with civil or military authorities were subject to separation for unfitness. An UD 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. The Board notes the applicant’s contention that his discharge was too harsh given the minor nature of his misconduct, but it finds insufficient evidence to support this claim.
2. The evidence of record shows the applicant was separated for unfitness based on an extensive history of misconduct that included offenses that resulted in his receiving unit punishment on four separate occasions and in his conviction by a summary court-martial on three separate occasions. The Board also notes that the applicant voluntarily waived his right to a hearing before a board of officers and his right to counsel.
3. The Board is satisfied that all requirements of law and regulation were met and the rights of the applicant were fully protected throughout the separation process. Further, it finds that the character of the applicant’s discharge accurately reflects his overall record of service. Therefore, the Board concludes that the requested relief is not warranted in this case.
4. 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.
5. 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
__RVO__ __RTD__ __KWL__ DENY APPLICATION
| CASE ID | AR2002073902 |
| SUFFIX | |
| RECON | |
| DATE BOARDED | 2002/07/25 |
| TYPE OF DISCHARGE | UD |
| DATE OF DISCHARGE | 1961/01/07 |
| DISCHARGE AUTHORITY | AR 635-208 |
| DISCHARGE REASON | Unfitness |
| BOARD DECISION | DENY |
| REVIEW AUTHORITY | |
| ISSUES 1. 189 | 110.0000 |
| 2. 360 | 144.0000 |
| 3. | |
| 4. | |
| 5. | |
| 6. |
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002068792C070402
On 31 October 1960, the applicant was recommended for separation from the Army under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-208 with a UD. On 8 December 1960, the appropriate authority approved the applicant's discharge with the issuance of a UD. The Board concluded that the applicant’s discharge was appropriate because the quality of his service was not consistent with the Army’s standards for acceptable personal conduct and performance of duty by military personnel.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2001 | 2001061182C070421
On 25 January 1961, while the applicant was confined at the Special Processing Detachment, he underwent a mental status evaluation by professionally trained personnel and was determined to be suffering from a passive aggressive reaction that existed prior to service. On 2 March 1961, the applicant was discharged for unfitness under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-208, with a UD. In light of his good post-service conduct, and considering the nature of his indisciplines while on active...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2003 | 2003089227C070403
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. On 3 November 1982, the Army Discharge Review Board denied the applicant’s request for a discharge upgrade to honorable.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2003 | 2003090197C070212
On 21 December 1961, a psychiatric evaluation was completed on the applicant. The evidence of record further shows that the applicant was represented by counsel during the board of officers proceedings, which were conducted to determine his suitability for continued service. BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION:
ARMY | BCMR | CY2001 | 2001060056C070421
The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein. APPLICANT REQUESTS: That his undesirable discharge be upgraded to a general discharge. On 29 November 1960 the applicant acknowledged that his unit commander was initiating action to administratively separate him from active duty under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-208.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2004 | 2004100798C070208
The unit commander also states the applicant was good at performing those duties that he was assigned most of the time and that there appeared to be nothing wrong with him physically or mentally. The applicant may have performed assigned tasks well most of the time, even so, his personal conduct and attitude rendered both his conduct and efficiency rating unsatisfactory and he received no awards. The Board concludes that the applicant has provided no evidence to establish a basis for the...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002078823C070215
He completed 2 years, 11 months and 2 days of total active service and he had approximately 84 days of lost time due to AWOL and confinement. On 18 February 1963, the Army Discharge Review Board denied the applicant’s request for an upgrade of his discharge. However, there is no evidence of record that shows that he was an alcoholic while he was in the Army.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2003 | 2003085224C070212
On the same date, the applicant's squad leader indicated in a written statement that the applicant had goofed off on most details for the past 6 months. During his prior period of enlistment, he completed 4 years, 3 months and 12 days of active military service. On 12 October 1964, the Army Discharge Review Board denied the applicant’s request for an upgrade of his discharge.Army Regulation 635-208, in effect at the time, set forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002067641C070402
The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein. EVIDENCE OF RECORD : The applicant's military records show: There is no indication 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 | 2002077695C070215
The applicant was released from confinement on 10 August 1960 pursuant to the modification of the sentence announced in Special Court-Martial Order Number 5, Headquarters, US Army, Hawaii, dated 9 August 1960, which directed that so much of the earlier approved sentence in excess of confinement at hard labor for 1 month and forfeiture of $43.00 per month for 1 month was set aside. The applicant was discharged on 30 January 1961 under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-208. DISCUSSION :...