| Mr. Carl W. S. Chun | Director | |
| Mrs. Nancy L. Amos | Analyst |
| Mr. Ted S. Kanamine | Chairperson | |
| Mr. William D. Powers | Member | |
| Mr. Frank C. Jones | Member |
APPLICANT REQUESTS: That his discharge under other than honorable conditions (UOTHC) be changed to a medical discharge.
APPLICANT STATES: That he had problems with his right foot tendon and sought medical treatment but they said nothing could be done. He was unable to wear laced shoes. He went absent without leave (AWOL) for 2 days and when he returned his commander said they would give him a medical discharge which was referred to as a "208." His DD Form 214 (Report of Separation) indicated he received a medical discharge but he does not have a copy and the National Personnel Records Center says his files were burned in 1973. He provides no supporting evidence.
EVIDENCE OF RECORD: The applicant's military records were lost or destroyed in the National Personnel Records Center fire in 1973. Information contained herein was obtained from reconstructed records.
The applicant enlisted in the Army National Guard on 24 May 1959. He was ordered to active duty for training on 26 July 1959.
On 17 September 1959, the applicant was convicted by a special court-martial of being AWOL from on or about 31 August to on or about 11 September 1959. He was sentenced to be confined at hard labor for 6 months (suspended for 6 months) and to forfeit $52.00 pay for 6 months.
On 15 October 1959, the applicant was convicted by a special court-martial of being AWOL from on or about 19 September to on or about 6 October 1959. He was sentenced to be confined at hard labor for months and to forfeit $52.00 pay for 6 months.
The applicant's discharge packet is not available. His DD Form 214 is not available. A Certification of Military Service shows he was separated on 3 December 1959 with a discharge UOTHC.
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 a discharge UOTHC 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.
Army Regulation 635-40 governs the evaluation of physical fitness of soldiers who may be unfit to perform their military duties because of physical disability. In pertinent part, it states that an enlisted soldier may not be referred for, or continue, physical disability processing when action has been started under any regulatory provisions which authorized a characterization of service of UOTHC.
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 and, in the absence of evidence to the contrary, it is presumed that the discharge proceedings were conducted in accordance with law and regulations applicable at the time.
2. If the applicant was told he would get a "208" discharge, the Board presumes his commander was referring to an administrative discharge, under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-208, for unfitness. This type of discharge would be in accordance with his record of service as demonstrated by his two courts-martial for two periods of AWOL totaling about 30 days.
3. There is no evidence to show the applicant had a medical problem with his right foot. In any case, since it appears he was processed for discharge for unfitness, which authorized a characterization of service of UOTHC, he was not eligible for physical disability processing.
4. 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
__tsk___ __wdp___ __fcj___ DENY APPLICATION
| CASE ID | AR2003086185 |
| SUFFIX | |
| RECON | |
| DATE BOARDED | 20030812 |
| TYPE OF DISCHARGE | UOTHC |
| DATE OF DISCHARGE | 19591203 |
| DISCHARGE AUTHORITY | AR 635-208 |
| DISCHARGE REASON | A51.00 |
| BOARD DECISION | DENY |
| REVIEW AUTHORITY | Mr. Chun |
| ISSUES 1. | 110.00 |
| 2. | |
| 3. | |
| 4. | |
| 5. | |
| 6. |
ARMY | BCMR | CY2003 | 2003088024C070403
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. EVIDENCE OF RECORD : The applicant's military records show:
ARMY | BCMR | CY2001 | 2001056910C070420
On 20 December 1960, the applicant was convicted by a special court-martial of being AWOL from 23 August – 27 November 1960. On 30 March 1961, the applicant was discharged, in pay grade E-1, under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-208 for unfitness with an undesirable, discharge UOTHC. On 6 March 1968, the Army Discharge Review Board (ADRB) denied the applicant’s request for an upgraded discharge.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002069577C070402
The applicant was convicted by a summary court-martial on 23 March 1961 of stealing property (a pair of combat boots) from another service member, of a value of less than $20.00. On 26 November 1973, the Army Discharge Review Board (ADRB) denied the applicant’s request to upgrade his discharge. 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:
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 | CY2001 | 2001052858C070420
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. On 17 March 1965 the company commander recommended that the applicant be discharged under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-208 for unfitness with an undesirable discharge. However, the Board reviewed the applicant’s brief record of service which included two special court-martial convictions and determined that his quality...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2001 | 2001052894C070420
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. On 14 October 1981, the...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002075897C070403
The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein. On 6 November 1961, the pin in his right tibia was removed and a cast applied. On 5 September 1962, the applicant was discharged, in pay grade E-1, under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-208 for unfitness, with a discharge under other than honorable conditions.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2003 | 2003086761C070212
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 20 March 1981 the Army Discharge Review Board again denied his request to upgrade his discharge.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2003 | 2003086942C070212
APPLICANT STATES : That he was punished for having a medical disability due to the disease of alcoholism. EVIDENCE OF RECORD : The applicant's military records show: Carl W. S. Chun Director, Army Board for Correction of Military RecordsINDEXCASE IDAR2003086942SUFFIXRECONYYYYMMDDDATE BOARDED20030826TYPE OF DISCHARGEUDDATE OF DISCHARGE19660519DISCHARGE AUTHORITYAR635-208 DISCHARGE REASONUnfitness due to an established pattern shirking BOARD DECISIONDENYREVIEW AUTHORITYMr.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2005 | 20050004902C070206
On 12 February 1960, the separation authority approved the recommendation for separation under the provisions of Army Regulation 635- 208 for unfitness and directed that the applicant be issued an undesirable discharge. On 18 February 1960, the applicant was discharged with an undesirable discharge and a characterization of service as under other than honorable conditions under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-208 for unfitness due to frequent involvement in incidents of a...