| Mr. Carl W. S. Chun | Director | |
| Mrs. Carolyn G. Wade | Analyst |
| Mr. Raymond J. Wagner | Chairperson | |
| Ms. Barbara J. Ellis | Member | |
| Ms. Linda M. Barker | Member |
APPLICANT REQUESTS: In effect, that his undesirable discharge (UD) be upgraded to honorable.
APPLICANT STATES: In effect, that he was young and immature when he was discharged, but he has learned much over the years. He states that he was told that his discharge would be automatically upgraded in less than a year. In support of his request, the applicant submitted a copy of his DD Form 214 (Armed Forces of the United States Report of Transfer or Discharge) and three letters of character reference from companies with which he transacts business.
EVIDENCE OF RECORD: The applicant's military records show:
He enlisted in the Regular Army on 6 March 1958 for a period of 3 years. Following all required military training and airborne training, the applicant was awarded military occupational specialty (MOS) 120.00 Pioneer.
On 31 October 1958, the applicant was convicted by summary court-martial of knowingly breaking a lawful order not to leave the base. He was sentenced to 30 days' hard labor and forfeiture of $55.00 pay per month for 1 month. The sentence was approved on 31 October 1958.
On 22 November 1958, the unexecuted portion of the applicant's sentence to hard labor was suspended until 30 November 1958.
On 16 November 1959, the applicant was convicted by summary court-martial of failing to go to his appointed place of duty. He was sentenced to forfeiture of $50.00 per month for 1 month and reduction to the grade of Recruit/E-1. The sentence was approved on the same day.
On 10 December 1959, the applicant was convicted by a special court-martial of assaulting a private first class/E-3 by striking at him with his fists and feet. He was sentenced to confinement at hard labor for 3 months and forfeiture of $70.00 per month for 3 months. The sentenced was adjudged on 14 December 1959.
On 19 December 1959, the applicant underwent a neuropsychiatric examination and was found to be free from mental disease, defect, derangement, and to possess the mental capacity to know right from wrong.
On 16 January 1960, the unexecuted portion of the applicant's sentence to confinement was suspended and the unexecuted portion of the approved sentence to forfeiture of $70.00 pay per month for 3 months was remitted.
On 3 August 1960, the applicant accepted nonjudicial punishment (NJP) under the provisions of Article 15, Uniform Code of Military Justice for failing to report to reveille formation. His punishment consisted 10 days' restriction.
On 15 October 1960, the applicant accepted NJP for conduct prejudicial to good order and discipline. His punishment consisted of 2 hours' extra duty for 14 days.
On 5 November 1960, the applicant accepted NJP for breaking restriction. His punishment consisted of 2 hours' extra duty for 7 days.
On 21 January 1961, the applicant was convicted by a special court-martial for striking a specialist/E-4 on the face. He was sentenced to confinement at hard labor for 60 days and forfeiture of $70.00 pay per month for 2 months. The sentence was approved on 27 January 1961.
On 20 February 1961, the applicant’s unit commander requested that he be discharged under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-208 for unfitness with a UD. The commander’s specific reason for recommending the applicant for separation was his frequent incidents of a discreditable nature with military authorities. The unit commander stated that he believed that the Army had done all that it could to make the applicant a soldier and recommended that the applicant appear before a board of officers.
On 10 March 1961, the applicant appeared before a board of officers. On the same date, the board of officers found him unfit for further military service due to frequent incidents of a discreditable nature with civil and military authorities. The Board recommended that the applicant be discharged under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-208 for unfitness with a UD.
On 29 March 1961, the appropriate authority approved the recommendation to discharge the applicant with a UD. Accordingly, on 6 April 1961, the applicant was discharged from the Army after completing 2 years, 10 months, and 7 days of active military service and accruing 84 days of lost time.
Army Regulation 635-208, then in effect, provided in pertinent part the policies, procedures, and guidance for the prompt elimination of enlisted personnel who were determined to be unfit for further military service. Individuals discharged under this regulation were normally issued a UD.
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 record does not support, and the applicant has not presented any evidence that he was told that his discharge would automatically be upgraded. Furthermore, the US Army does not have, nor has it ever had, a policy to automatically upgrade discharges. Each case is decided on its own merits when an applicant submits a request for a change in discharge. Changes may be warranted if the Board determines that the characterization of service or the reason for discharge, or both, were improper or inequitable. The Defense Discharge Review Standards specifically state that no factors should be established that require automatic change or denial of a change in discharge.
3. The Board noted that the applicant met entrance qualification standards, to include age. The Board further found no evidence that the applicant was any less mature than other soldiers of the same age who successfully completed military service.
4. The Board noted that the applicant’s chain of command tried to assist him in performing and conducting himself to Army standards by providing counseling and by the imposition of nonjudicial and judicial punishment; however, the applicant failed to respond appropriately to these efforts. The applicant by continuing his pattern of misconduct and poor duty performance left his command no choice but to initiate separation action.
5. The Board carefully reviewed all of the applicant’s faithful and honorable service as well as his misconduct. The Board determined that the applicant’s numerous incidents of misconduct adversely affected the quality of his service, brought discredit on the Army, and were prejudicial to good order and discipline. These incidents of misconduct clearly diminished the quality of the applicant’s service below that meriting a general or fully honorable discharge.
6. 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
__rjw___ __bje___ __lmb___ DENY APPLICATION
| CASE ID | AR2002079621 |
| SUFFIX | |
| RECON | |
| DATE BOARDED | 20030408 |
| TYPE OF DISCHARGE | UD |
| DATE OF DISCHARGE | 19610406 |
| DISCHARGE AUTHORITY | AR 635-208. . . . . |
| DISCHARGE REASON | A51.00 |
| BOARD DECISION | (DENY) |
| REVIEW AUTHORITY | |
| ISSUES 1. | 144.5000 |
| 2. | |
| 3. | |
| 4. | |
| 5. | |
| 6. |
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002079534C070215
The board of officers recommended that the applicant be discharged from the service under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-208 because of unfitness with an undesirable discharge. On 20 January 1960, the separation authority approved the board findings and directed that the applicant be discharged under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-208 with an undesirable discharge. Records show the applicant was discharged under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-208, for unfitness –...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2007 | 20070017762
On 6 February 1961, the applicants unit commander initiated separation under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-208 for unfitness. He had completed 2 years, 7 months, and 28 days of creditable active service, and had 206 days of lost time due to AWOL and confinement. There is no evidence of record, nor has the applicant provided sufficient evidence to support upgrade of his discharge.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100016316
At the time he had completed 1 year, 3 months, and 7 days of net active service this period; 6 months of other service; and 3 months and 18 days of foreign service. The evidence of record shows the applicant was diagnosed with and treated for whooping cough (pertussis). The evidence of record also shows that Army officials advised the applicant to report to a military medical facility for treatment.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2005 | 20050015643C070206
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 17 August 2006 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20050015643 I certify that hereinafter is recorded the true and complete record of the proceedings of the Army Board for Correction of Military Records in the case of the above-named individual. On 4 January 1960, the applicant acknowledged that he had been advised by counsel of the basis for the contemplated action against him under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-208 for unfitness. The separation...
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 :...
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 | CY2008 | 20080014635
When authorized, it is issued to a Soldier whose military record is satisfactory but not sufficiently meritorious to warrant an honorable discharge. There is no evidence which shows that the applicant's discharge proceedings were not in compliance with the applicable regulation in effect at the time. _________XXX______________ CHAIRPERSON I certify that herein is recorded the true and complete record of the proceedings of the Army Board for Correction of Military Records in this case.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2005 | 20050003649C070206
LaVerne Douglas | |Member | The Board considered the following evidence: Exhibit A - Application for correction of military records. There is no evidence of record which shows the applicant applied to the Army Discharge Review Board (ADRB) within its 15-year statute of limitations. The applicant has failed to show through the evidence submitted or the evidence of record that the type of discharge issued to him was in error or unjust.
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 | 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.