RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
IN THE CASE OF:
BOARD DATE: 22 January 2008
DOCKET NUMBER: AR20070011549
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.
Ms. Catherine C. Mitrano
Director
Mr. Michael L. Engle
Analyst
The following members, a quorum, were present:
Mr. James E. Vick
Chairperson
Mr. Thomas M. Ray
Member
Mr. Jeffrey C. Redmann
Member
The Board considered the following evidence:
Exhibit A - Application for correction of military records.
Exhibit B - Military Personnel Records (including advisory opinion, if any).
THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE:
1. The applicant requests that his general discharge under honorable conditions be upgraded to honorable.
2. The applicant states that his discharge was inequitable because it was based on a single incident during his 19 months of service. He further states that he was young; that his brother was being mistreated; and that he made a mistake. He contends that upgrading his discharge is the right thing to do.
3. The applicant provides a copy of his Report of Separation from the Armed Forces of the United States (DD Form 214).
CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:
1. Title 10, U.S. Code, section 1552(b), provides that applications for correction of military records must be filed within 3 years after discovery of the alleged error or injustice. This provision of law also allows the Army Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR) to excuse an applicants failure to timely file within the 3-year statute of limitations if the ABCMR determines it would be in the interest of justice to do so. While it appears the applicant did not file within the time frame provided in the statute of limitations, the ABCMR has elected to conduct a substantive review of this case and, only to the extent relief, if any, is granted, has determined it is in the interest of justice to excuse the applicants failure to timely file. In all other respects, there are insufficient bases to waive the statute of limitations for timely filing.
2. The applicant's military records are not available to the Board for review. A fire destroyed approximately 18 million service members records at the National Personnel Records Center in 1973. It is believed that the applicant's records were lost or destroyed in that fire. However, there were sufficient documents remaining in a reconstructed record for the Board to conduct a fair and impartial review of this case.
3. On 8 February 1954, the applicant enlisted in the Regular Army for 3 years. He completed his initial training and was awarded military occupational specialty 140.00 (Field Artillery).
4. The discharge packet is missing from his military records. However, his
DD Form 214 shows that he was administratively discharged on 16 September 1955, under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-209, paragraph 3d, for unsuitability as a youthful offender. His service was characterized as general under honorable conditions. He had completed 1 year, 9 months and 9 days of creditable active duty and had 10 days of lost time.
5. There is no evidence that the applicant ever applied to the Army Discharge Review Board for an upgrade of his discharge within its 15-year statute of limitations.
6. Army Regulation 635-209 (Personnel Separations), 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. Otherwise, return to duty or referral for separation under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-208 was directed.
DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:
1. 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. The character of the discharge is commensurate with his overall record.
2. There is no available evidence explaining the reasons or circumstances surrounding the applicants discharge. Furthermore, the applicant has not provided any mitigating evidence or persuasive argument to convince the Board that upgrading his discharge would be the right thing to do.
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 the aforementioned requirement.
BOARD VOTE:
________ ________ ________ GRANT FULL RELIEF
________ ________ ________ GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF
________ ________ ________ GRANT FORMAL HEARING
________ ________ ________ DENY APPLICATION
BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION:
The Board determined that the evidence presented does not demonstrate the existence of a probable error or injustice. Therefore, the Board determined that the overall merits of this case are insufficient as a basis for correction of the records of the individual concerned.
______________________
CHAIRPERSON
INDEX
CASE ID
AR
SUFFIX
RECON
YYYYMMDD
DATE BOARDED
YYYYMMDD
TYPE OF DISCHARGE
(HD, GD, UOTHC, UD, BCD, DD, UNCHAR)
DATE OF DISCHARGE
YYYYMMDD
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY
AR . . . . .
DISCHARGE REASON
BOARD DECISION
(NC, GRANT , DENY, GRANT PLUS)
REVIEW AUTHORITY
ISSUES 1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002066377C070402
The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein. After hearing testimony and reviewing the evidence of record, the board found that the applicant was unsuitable for further military service because of character and behavior disorders and disruptive reactions to acute or special stress. The appropriate authority approved the findings and recommendation of the board and the applicant was discharged under honorable...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2007 | 20070016443
He does not believe he should have been discharged from the Army for "unsuitability." The Board did not determine that the authority or reason for his discharge was in error. A second memorandum, dated 8 February 1978, and better known as the Nelson Memorandum, expanded the review policy and specified that the presence of a personality disorder diagnosis would justify upgrade of a discharge to fully honorable except in cases where there are "clear and demonstrable reasons" why a fully...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2004 | 20040011266C070208
The applicant requests that his records be corrected by upgrading his discharge. On 23 January 1963, the appropriate separation authority approved the discharge request and directed the issuance of a general discharge. That determination was well within the separation’s authority at that time.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2005 | 20050003076C070206
The applicant’s military records are not available to the Board for review. Records contain a partially burned copy of DA Form 37 (Report of Proceedings.…), which shows the board of officers found the applicant unsuitable for further military service because of character and behavior disorders and recommended that he be discharged from the service because of unsuitability. The applicant was separated on 10 July 1956, under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-209, by reason of...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090014971
The applicant's military service records are not available to the Board for review. The applicant's DD Form 214 shows he was discharged from the U.S. Army under honorable conditions on 12 January 1960, under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-209 (Personnel Separations - Unsuitability) with Separation Program Number (SPN) 264, for unsuitability (character and behavior disorder) and issued a DD Form 257A (General Discharge Certificate). There is no evidence the applicant applied to the...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090015123
The applicants military records are not available for review. A Board of Officers convened on 18 February 1958 and found that the applicant was unsuitable for further military service because of character and behavior disorders of schizoid personality. As a result, the Board recommends that all Department of the Army records of the individual concerned be corrected by: a. voiding the applicants 24 February 1958 general discharge under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-209 and issuing...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002066899C070402
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 the application was filed within the time established by statute, and if not, whether it would be in the interest of justice to waive the failure to timely file. On 2 December 1963, he was discharged under honorable conditions, by reason of unsuitability, under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-209. The applicant...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002071354C070402
The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein. On 14 September 1965, the applicant was discharged, in pay grade E-1, under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-209. 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 | CY2010 | 20100023058
The applicant requests upgrade of his general discharge to an honorable discharge. On 3 December 1965, the applicant's unit commander notified him that it was his intent to recommended his separation from military service under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-209 (Personnel Separations-Discharge-Unsuitability) with issuance of a General Discharge Certificate. The discharge proceedings were conducted in accordance with applicable law and regulations at the time and the character of...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2004 | 2004102655C070208
Title 10, U.S. Code, Section 1552(b), provides that applications for correction of military records must be filed within 3 years after discovery of the alleged error or injustice. On 21 September 1961, the applicant’s unit commander recommended that a Board of Officers be appointed under the provisions of AR 635-208 to determine if he should be discharged from the service for unfitness. Action was to be taken to discharge an individual for unsuitability when, in the commander's opinion, it...