| Mr. Carl W. S. Chun | Director | |
| Ms. Nancy L. Amos | Analyst |
| Mr. Raymond V. O’Connor, Jr. | Chairperson | ||
| Mr. Richard T. Dunbar | Member | ||
| Mr. Kenneth W. Lapin | Member |
APPLICANT REQUESTS: That his undesirable discharge be changed to a general under honorable conditions discharge.
APPLICANT STATES: That when he was in the service he missed bed check and he had a drinking problem. He has not had a drink in 11 years now. He has tried to be a good citizen, husband, and grandfather. He is in very bad health and is not expected to live. He served his country; now he, his wife, and family would appreciate it if his discharge could be upgraded.
EVIDENCE OF RECORD: The applicant's military records show:
He enlisted in the Regular Army on 1 August 1958. He completed basic combat training and advanced individual training and was awarded military occupational specialty 640.00 (Light Vehicle Driver).
Between 13 July 1959 and 4 April 1960, the applicant accepted nonjudicial punishment under Article 15, Uniform Code of Military Justice on three occasions for failing to take proper care of Government equipment, driving too fast for road conditions, and missing bed check.
The applicant was honorably discharged on 25 August 1960 for the purpose of immediately reenlisting on 26 August 1960.
On 25 February 1961 and 4 November 1961, the applicant accepted non-judicial punishment under Article 15, Uniform Code of Military Justice for having a motor vehicle accident and for missing bed check, respectively.
On 23 December 1961, the applicant was convicted by a summary court-martial for being absent without leave (AWOL) from midnight 18 December 1961 to 12:33 a.m. on 19 December 1961. On 11 January 1962, he was convicted by a summary court-martial for being AWOL from midnight 6 January 1962 to 2:15 a.m. on 7 January 1962.
On 20 January 1962, the applicant received a psychiatric evaluation. No psychosis, neurosis, or organic brain syndrome was found. He admitted that since being relieved of driving assignments he had become angry and reacted with excessive drinking and indifference. Separation under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-209 (unsuitability) was recommended.
On 27 February 1962, the applicant was convicted by a summary court-martial of being AWOL from 1:15 a.m. 25 February 1962 to midnight on 25 February 1962.
On 13 February 1962, the applicant’s commander recommended he be separated under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-208 for unfitness. The commander cited the applicant’s several letters of indebtedness, Article 15s, and summary courts-martial as the reasons for the recommended separation. As additional reasons, he cited the applicant’s borrowing money from fellow soldiers and two German civilian guards and failing to repay them and the applicant’s unsatisfactory performance of duty and failure to respond to counseling.
On 13 February 1962, the applicant waived his right to appear before a board of officers and elected not to submit a statement in his own behalf.
On 19 March 1962, the appropriate authority approved the recommendation and directed the applicant receive an undesirable discharge.
On 13 April 1962, the applicant completed a separation physical and was found qualified for separation.
On 13 April 1962, the applicant was discharged, in pay grade E-1, under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-208 for unfitness, with an undesirable discharge. He had completed a total of 3 years, 8 months, and 13 days of creditable active service and had no lost time.
Army Regulation 635-208, in effect at the time, set forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel for unfitness. The regulation provided for the discharge of individuals by reason of unfitness with an undesirable discharge when it had been determined that an individual’s military record was characterized by one of more of the following: frequent incidents of a discreditable nature with civil or military authorities; sexual perversion; drug addiction or the unauthorized use or possession of habit forming narcotic drugs or marijuana; an established pattern for shirking; or an established pattern showing dishonorable failure to pay just debts.
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 applicant's administrative separation was accomplished in compliance with applicable regulations with no indication of procedural errors which would tend to jeopardize his rights. Although the medical examiner during his psychiatric examination recommended the applicant be separated under Army Regulation 635-209, the Board sees no error or injustice with his being separated under Army Regulation 635-208. The discipline problems for which he received both judicial and nonjudicial punishment were relatively minor; however, they were numerous. The frequency of his disciplinary problems combined with his extensive failure to pay just debts, for which excessive drinking was no excuse, rendered his separation for unfitness appropriate.
3. The applicant’s good service during his first enlistment was recognized with an honorable discharge.
4. The Board is sympathetic with the applicant’s current medical condition; however, that factor does not warrant granting the relief requested.
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 | AR2002074112 |
| SUFFIX | |
| RECON | |
| DATE BOARDED | 2002/07/25 |
| TYPE OF DISCHARGE | UD |
| DATE OF DISCHARGE | 1962/0413 |
| DISCHARGE AUTHORITY | AR 635-208 |
| DISCHARGE REASON | A50.00 |
| BOARD DECISION | DENY |
| REVIEW AUTHORITY | |
| ISSUES 1. | 110.00 |
| 2. | |
| 3. | |
| 4. | |
| 5. | |
| 6. |
ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080006942
On 21 February 1963, the applicants company commander recommended the applicants separation from that military service under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-208. On 18 April 1963, the lieutenant colonel serving as Commander, 38th Transportation Battalion (Germany), recommended approval of the applicants discharge under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-208 and that the applicant be given an undesirable discharge. The applicants DD Form 214 (Armed Forces of the United States...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | AR20080006942
On 21 February 1963, the applicants company commander recommended the applicants separation from that military service under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-208. On 18 April 1963, the lieutenant colonel serving as Commander, 38th Transportation Battalion (Germany), recommended approval of the applicants discharge under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-208 and that the applicant be given an undesirable discharge. The applicants DD Form 214 (Armed Forces of the United States...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2003 | 2003083387C070212
APPLICANT REQUESTS: That his discharge be upgraded to honorable or general under honorable conditions. On 3 January 1962, the applicant was discharged, in pay grade E-1, under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-208 for unfitness, with an undesirable, under other than honorable conditions discharge. A general discharge is a separation from the Army under honorable conditions.
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 | CY2004 | 2004105854C070208
The applicant requests, in effect, that his undesirable discharge be upgraded to an honorable discharge. A review of the records fail to show that the applicant ever 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 shows that he was convicted by two summary court-martials and by one special court-martial and that he had NJP imposed against him twice as a result of the offenses that he committed.
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 | CY2002 | 2002066638C070402
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. Army Regulation 635-208, in effect at the time, set forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel for unfitness.
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.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2001 | 2001064350C070421
The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein. When separation for unfitness was warranted, a characterization of service of under other than honorable conditions discharge was normally determined and an Undesirable Discharge Certificate issued. He has not shown he was punished and discharged because of his age or vision, or that he was physically and mentally abused.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2004 | 20040000668C070208
Powers | |Member | The Board considered the following evidence: Exhibit A - Application for correction of military records. The available records fail to show that the applicant ever 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 shows that he was convicted by one summary court-martial and by one special court-martial and that he had NJP imposed against him on seven separate occasions as...