| Mr. Carl W. S. Chun | Director | |
| Ms. Antoinette Farley | Analyst |
| Mr. Raymond J. Wagner | Chairperson | |
| Mr. Melvin H. Meyer | Member | |
| Ms. Margaret V. Thompson | Member |
APPLICANT REQUESTS: That his discharge be upgraded to honorable.
APPLICANT STATES: That he was assured that his discharge would be upgraded within 6 months.
EVIDENCE OF RECORD: The applicant's military records show:
He was inducted into and entered active duty on 10 December 1965. He completed basic combat training and began advanced individual training as a telephone switchboard operator.
On 29 August 1966, the applicant was convicted by a special court-martial of being absent without leave (AWOL) from 15 June to 5 July 1966, from 9 July to 25 July 1966 and on 10 August 1966 of violating parole. He was sentenced to confinement at hard labor for 6 months, forfeiture of $70.00 pay per month for
3 months, and reduction to pay grade E-1.
On 10 January 1967, the applicant was notified that he was being recommended for discharge under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-212, for unfitness. The unit commander cited the reason for his proposed action as defiance and AWOLs. On the same day his intermediate commander agreed with the recommendation. The applicant consulted with counsel and waived his right to have a board of officers consider his case, to be represented by counsel and to submit a statement in his own behalf. He also acknowledged that he could expect to encounter substantial prejudice in civilian life.
On 10 November 1966, a medical examination found him to be qualified for separation with a physical profile of 1.1.1.1.1.1.
On 13 January 1967, the applicant received a psychiatric examination. He was diagnosed as a chronic, severe, passive-aggressive personality. The applicant had no disqualifying mental or physical defects requiring medical processing. He was responsible for his actions and could both distinguish right from wrong and adhere to the right. He had the mental capacity to participate in board proceedings. He was cleared for appropriate administrative action.
On 1 February 1967, the separation authority approved the recommendation and directed the applicant be issued an Undesirable Discharge Certificate under paragraph 6a(1) of Army Regulation 635-212. He had completed 7 months and 11 days of creditable service and 196 days of lost time due to AWOL or confinement.
Army Regulation 635-212, in effect at the time, set forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel. Paragraph 6a(1) of the regulation provided, in pertinent part, that members involved in frequent incidents of a discreditable nature with civil or military authorities were subject to separation for unfitness. An undesirable discharge was normally considered appropriate.
On 10 March 1980, the Army Discharge Review Board denied his request for upgrade of 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:
1. The discharge proceedings were conducted in accordance with law and regulations applicable at the time. The character of the discharge is commensurate with the applicant's overall record of military service.
2. The U.S. 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 requests 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.
3. 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.
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
___RJW _ __MHM _ ___MVT _ DENY APPLICATION
| CASE ID | AR2003086985 |
| SUFFIX | |
| RECON | |
| DATE BOARDED | 20030930 |
| TYPE OF DISCHARGE | UD |
| DATE OF DISCHARGE | 19670102 |
| DISCHARGE AUTHORITY | AR 635-212 |
| DISCHARGE REASON | Unfit |
| BOARD DECISION | DENY |
| REVIEW AUTHORITY | DIRECTOR |
| ISSUES 1. | A 144.8300 |
| 2. | |
| 3. | |
| 4. | |
| 5. | |
| 6. |
ARMY | BCMR | CY2003 | 2003083902C070212
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 3 November 1967, the applicant's unit commander notified the applicant that he was recommending that he [the applicant] be discharged from the Army for unfitness under the provisions of AR 635-212, Paragraphs 6a(1). Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 3-7, defines a general discharge as a separation from the Army under...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2001 | 2001057684C070420
The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein. The applicant’s official military records show that he was AWOL from 26 September to 6 December 1966. On 29 August 1967, the applicant was discharged in pay grade E-1, under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-212, for unfitness with a discharge UOTHC.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | 20110013343
On 5 July 1967, the applicant's commander notified him that he was being recommended for separation under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-212, paragraph 6a due to unfitness. On 7 July 1967, the applicant's commander recommended him for separation due to unfitness under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-212. There is no indication that the applicant applied to the Army Discharge Review Board for an upgrade of his discharge.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2005 | 20050000386C070206
The applicant requested consideration by a board of officers and to personally appear before that board. The board recommended the applicant be discharged from the service due to unfitness with issuance of an Undesirable Discharge Certificate. Army Regulation 635-200 (Active Duty Enlisted Administrative Separations), paragraph 3-7, provides that an honorable discharge is a separation with honor and entitles the recipient to benefits provided by law.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080009046
Army Regulation 635-212, in effect at the time, set forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel. Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 3-7a, provides that an honorable discharge is a separation with honor and entitles the recipient to benefits provided by law. It is noted that the ADRB upgraded the applicants undesirable discharge to a general under honorable conditions discharge under the SDRP.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2007 | 20070005773
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 19 September 2007 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20070005773 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. The applicant's record shows he enlisted in the Regular Army on 30 August 1966, at the age of 17 years, 5 months, and 5 days. The evidence of record shows that the applicant had a pattern of shirking by having gone...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002075234C070403
The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein. On 18 December 1974, the Army Discharge Review Board denied the applicant's request for an upgrade of his discharge. On 18 December 1974, the Army Discharge Review Board denied the applicant's request for an upgrade of his discharge.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090002144
There is no evidence of record which shows the applicant applied to the Army Discharge Review Board (ADRB) within that boards 15-year statute of limitations. However, the evidence of record shows the applicant received counseling in January 1967 and February 1967. There is no evidence of record which indicates the actions taken in his case were in error or unjust; therefore, there is no basis for granting the applicant's request for an upgrade of his discharge.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2005 | 20050000074C070206
He failed to report to Fort Knox and was placed in an AWOL status effective 8 October 1966 and remained AWOL until 28 February 1967. There is no evidence that the applicant applied to the Army Discharge Review Board for an upgrade of his discharge within its 15-year statute of limitations. He was granted fourteen days ordinary leave after BCT and after his leave, he failed to report to his AIT at Fort Knox.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002070208C070402
The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein. On an unknown date, the applicant voluntarily requested an assignment in Vietnam. On 5 February 1970, the applicant was discharged in pay grade E-1, under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-212, for unfitness with an Undesirable Discharge Certificate.