| Mr. Carl W. S. Chun | Director | |
| Mr. Jessie B. Strickland | Analyst |
| Mr. Raymond J. Wagner | Chairperson | ||
| Ms. Barbara J. Ellis | Member | ||
| Ms. Linda M. Barker | Member |
APPLICANT REQUESTS: In effect, that his undesirable discharge be upgraded to honorable.
APPLICANT STATES: In effect, that his two younger sisters were being molested by his stepfather and he was 17 years of age and could not get help for his sisters. His superiors were not willing to listen and the court-martial did not have all of the facts presented for their decision. In support of his application he submits a statement from a psychiatrist and a letter from his sister.
EVIDENCE OF RECORD: The applicant's military records show:
He enlisted with parental consent in Los Angeles, California, on 10 August 1969, for a period of 3 years and assignment to Europe. He was transferred to Fort Ord, California, to undergo his training.
He completed his basic combat training and remained at Fort Ord to undergo his advanced individual training as a field communications crewman.
The applicant was reported absent without leave (AWOL) from 14 November to 15 November 1960 (1 day) and received company punishment for that offense, which consisted of extra duty for 10 days.
The applicant went AWOL from 21 November to 14 December 1960. He again departed AWOL on 17 December and remained absent until he was returned to military control on 28 December 1960 and charges were preferred against him.
On 6 January 1961, the applicant underwent a psychiatric evaluation and informed the psychiatrist that he enlisted in the Army along with a group of friends because he wanted to try it out. He soon found that he did not like it and began going AWOL because he was sick of the Army and wanted out. The psychiatrist opined that the applicant was a hostile, defiant and uncooperative individual who appears to have had a life-long pattern of trouble with authority. He deemed the applicant free of psychiatric disease and indicated that he was able to distinguish right from wrong and to adhere to the right. He also opined that further rehabilitation would be futile and recommended administrative separation under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-208.
On 13 January 1961, he was convicted by a special court-martial of being AWOL from 21 November to 14 December 1960 and from 17 December to 28 December 1960 and being disrespectful to a superior commission officer (company commander). He was sentenced to confinement at hard labor for 3 months and a forfeiture of pay.
The applicant's commander also notified him on 13 January 1961 that he was initiating action to separate him from the service under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-208, for unfitness, due to his frequent involvement in incidents of a discreditable nature with military authorities. The applicant waived his right to appear before a board of officers, to consult with counsel, and elected not to submit a statement in his own behalf.
On 25 January 1961, the appropriate authority (a major general) approved the recommendation for discharge and directed that he be furnished an Undesirable Discharge Certificate.
Accordingly, he was discharged under other than honorable conditions on 8 February 1961, under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-208, for unfitness due to frequent involvement in incidents of a discreditable nature with military authorities. He had served 3 months and 28 days of total active service and had 61 days of lost time due to AWOL and confinement.
The supporting statement from a psychiatrist submitted by the applicant with his application indicates that the applicant had previously been diagnosed with schizophrenia and depression and that his signs and symptoms indicate post-traumatic stress disorder and personality problems. He also indicates that the applicant indicated he had a traumatic childhood and that his issues reached crisis proportions when he joined the Army and was trying to be of support to his younger sisters who were being sexually abused at home. The psychiatrist opined that his problems were started while he was in the Army.
The supporting letter from his sister, which was also provided to the psychiatrist, indicates that she and her sister were being sexually abused by their step-father and they sought the applicant's help, which eventually led to his discharge from the Army.
There is no indication in the available records to show that the applicant ever sought the assistance of his chain of command for the problems he described. His records do show that the chain of command made numerous attempts to counsel and rehabilitate the applicant and he failed to respond to those attempts.
There is no indication in the available records 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.
Army Regulation 635-208, in effect at the time, set forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel by reason of unfitness for those individuals involved in frequent incidents of a discreditable nature with civil or military authorities. An undesirable discharge 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. 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 violations or procedural errors which would tend to jeopardize his rights.
3. Accordingly, the type of discharge directed and the reasons therefore were appropriate considering all of the available facts of the case.
4. The applicant’s contentions and supporting documents have been noted by the Board. However, they are not supported by the evidence of record and given his repeated misconduct and his otherwise undistinguished record of service during such a short period of time, they are not sufficiently mitigating to warrant an upgrade of his discharge.
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
__rjw ___ _be_____ ___lb ___ DENY APPLICATION
| CASE ID | AR2002081197 |
| SUFFIX | |
| RECON | YYYYMMDD |
| DATE BOARDED | 2003/04/08 |
| TYPE OF DISCHARGE | UD |
| DATE OF DISCHARGE | 1961/02/08 |
| DISCHARGE AUTHORITY | AR635-208 |
| DISCHARGE REASON | UNFIT |
| BOARD DECISION | DENY |
| REVIEW AUTHORITY | |
| ISSUES 1. 583 | 144.5000/A51.00 |
| 2. | |
| 3. | |
| 4. | |
| 5. | |
| 6. |
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002081500C070215
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...
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 | 2003088369C070403
The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein. He states that he was instructed to sign the blank form and that it was not until two years ago that he ordered a copy of his military records and discovered that the ORD Form 493 contained his initials. The psychiatrist recommended that he be separated from the Army under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-208.
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 | 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 | CY2011 | 20110013513
BOARD DATE: 3 January 2012 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20110013513 THE BOARD CONSIDERED THE FOLLOWING EVIDENCE: 1. He indicated at the time of his enlistment that his date of birth (DOB) was 6 May 1940. There is no evidence in the available records to show that the applicant ever applied to the Army Discharge Review Board for an upgrade of his discharge within that boards 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 | CY2009 | 20090021841
THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE: 1. On 19 March 1963, the applicant's commander notified him that he was initiating action to discharge him from the service under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-208 (Personnel Separations - Discharge - Undesirable Habits and Traits of Character) for unfitness due to his frequent involvements in incidents of a discreditable nature with civil and military authorities. However, there is no evidence in the available records to show he...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | 20110014695
However, since the applicant's diagnosis was considered to be a character and behavior disorder, it was felt that administrative separation under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-209 (Personnel Separations, Discharge, Inaptitude or Unsuitability) was more appropriate. An intermediate commander stated separation under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-209 was not deemed appropriate and he recommended the applicant be discharged under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-208. Army...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | 20110018576
The applicant, the sister of a deceased former service member (FSM), request upgrade of her brother's undesirable discharge. Army Regulation 635-208, in effect at the time, provided the authority for discharging enlisted personnel for unfitness. c. Paragraph 1-8f(1), an undesirable discharge is an administrative separation from the Army under conditions other than honorable.