MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION


         IN THE CASE OF:
        


         BOARD DATE: 11 March 2003
         DOCKET NUMBER: AR2002079331

         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.

Mr. Carl W. S. Chun		Director
Ms. Wanda L. Waller		Analyst

The following members, a quorum, were present:

Mr. Samuel A. Crumpler		Chairperson
Mr. Ted S. Kanamine		Member
Ms. Shirley Powell		Member

         The Board, established pursuant to authority contained in 10 U.S.C. 1552, convened at the call of the Chairperson on the above date. 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 to authorize a formal hearing, recommend that the records be corrected without a formal hearing, or to deny the application without a formal hearing if it is determined that insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate the existence of probable material error or injustice.

         The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein.

         The Board considered the following evidence:

         Exhibit A - Application for correction of military
records
         Exhibit B - Military Personnel Records (including
         advisory opinion, if any)

---

APPLICANT REQUESTS: In effect, that his general discharge be voided.

APPLICANT STATES: In effect, that he has never been a recruit or a soldier in the U.S. Army. He contends that he was never permitted to enlist in the U.S. Army in 1959, that a few white Army officers at Fort Hood, Texas, were permitted to hold him hostage and to falsify military records in his name in order to discharge him from the U.S. Army in 1960. He also contends that his birth mother did not have the legal right to consent to his enlistment in the Army and that he was the victim of racial discrimination. In support of his application, he submits two letters of explanation, dated 25 August 2002 and 11 June 2002.

Included with the applicant's application, is a letter from the applicant to the President of the United States, dated 2 September 2002. The Client Information and Quality Assurance of the Review Boards Agency responded to this letter on 11 December 2002.

EVIDENCE OF RECORD: The applicant's military records show:

At age 17, with his mother's consent, the applicant enlisted on 30 November 1959 for a period of 3 years.

While in basic combat training at Fort Hood, Texas, the applicant made repeated trips to the dispensary with complaints of chest pains. Electroencephalographic [an instrument or recording brain waves] studies were negative. In the opinion of the treating physicians, there was no evidence of organic disease. A psychiatric evaluation was requested on 26 January 1960.

On 8 February 1960, the applicant underwent a psychiatric evaluation. He was diagnosed with emotional instability reaction, chronic, severe; manifested by chest pains without organic disease, poor duty performance, and lack of initiative. The psychiatrist recommended that the applicant be separated from the military service under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-209.

On 11 February 1960, the unit commander recommended that the applicant be discharged under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-209 for unsuitability. He cited that the applicant lacked emotional control and stability and that the applicant constantly went to sick call but had no organic disease.

On 11 February 1960, after consulting with counsel, the applicant elected to decline counsel, waive consideration of his case by a board of officers, elected not to submit a statement in his own behalf and accepted a discharge characterized as honorable or general. His statement also includes "I have been advised that if I receive a General Discharge under the provisions of AR [Army Regulation] 635-209, such action will not deny me any rights or benefits to which I, as a veteran of military service, would otherwise normally be entitled. I have further been advised that if I am separated under the provisions of AR 635-209, I will be denied the right to further military service unless reentry is approved by The Adjutant General, Department of the Army."

On 15 February 1960, the separation authority approved the recommendation for discharge under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-209 for unsuitability due to character and behavior disorders. He also directed that the applicant be furnished a general discharge.

On 24 February 1960, the applicant was discharged with a general discharge under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-209 for unsuitability due to character and behavior disorders. He had served 2 months and 25 days of total active service.

The Army Discharge Review Board reviewed the applicant's discharge on
27 February 1961 and on 6 June 1962 and, on both occasions, determined that he was properly discharged.

The applicant's DD Form 293 (Application for Review of Discharge or Separation from the Armed Forces of the United States), dated 22 February 1962, states, "When I was discharged from the Army I didn't know the nature of my discharge, but since I've been out I've learned from the Dept. [Department] of the Army, that I was discharged due to nervousness. My actions in the Army were all a mistake, a mistake that I was well aware of but I didn't realize the record that I was making for myself. The complaints I made that lead to my discharge were untrue but my complaints nor my actions should have given the Army reasons to say that I was nervous. I went on sick call about four or five times stating that I was suffering from chest pains. The doctors told me that I was in perfect physical condition and that they couldn't find any reasons for me to have such pains. I made these complaints because I wanted to get out of the Army to go to college."

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, enuresis, chronic alcoholism, and homosexuality. 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.
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 considered the applicant's contention that he has never been a recruit or a soldier in the U.S. Army. However, evidence of record shows that he enlisted in the U.S. Army on 30 November 1959 for a period of 3 years.

2. The applicant's contentions that a few white Army officers at Fort Hood, Texas, were permitted to hold him hostage and to falsify military records in his name in order to discharge him from the United States Army in 1960, were not supported by the evidence of record. Evidence of record shows that prior to separation the applicant consulted with counsel and elected to decline counsel, waive his right to appear before a board of officers and accepted a discharge characterized as honorable or general. Evidence of record also shows that the applicant was separated with a general discharge on 24 February 1960 under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-209 for unsuitability due to character and behavior disorders. Also, by the applicant's own admission subsequent to his separation, he states, "The complaints I made that lead to my discharge were untrue" and "I went on sick call about four or five times stating that I was suffering from chest pains. The doctors told me that I was in perfect physical condition and that they couldn't find any reasons for me to have such pains. I made these complaints because I wanted to get out of the Army to go to college."

3. The Board considered the applicant's contention that his birth mother did not have the legal right to consent to his enlistment in the Army. However, there is no evidence of record available to the Board, and the applicant has provided no evidence, to support this contention. Evidence of record shows the applicant's mother gave her parental consent on 13 November 1959 for his enlistment in the U.S. Army. Her consent form also states, "I certify that the above applicant has no other legal guardian than me."

4. There is no evidence of record, and the applicant has provided no evidence, to support his contention that he was the victim of racial discrimination.

5. The applicant's administrative separation was accomplished in compliance with applicable regulation with no indication of procedural errors which would tend to jeopardize his rights.

6. The type of discharge directed and the reasons for separation were appropriate considering all the facts of the case.

7. 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.

8. In view of the foregoing, there is no basis for granting the applicant's request that his general discharge be voided.

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

SAC____ TSK____ SP______ DENY APPLICATION

                  Carl W. S. Chun
                  Director, Army Board for Correction
of Military Records

---

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2002079331
SUFFIX
RECON
DATE BOARDED	20030311
TYPE OF DISCHARGE
DATE OF DISCHARGE
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY
DISCHARGE REASON
BOARD DECISION	DENY
REVIEW AUTHORITY
ISSUES 1.	110.0200
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.