IN THE CASE OF:
BOARD DATE: 25 March 2010
DOCKET NUMBER: AR20090015123
THE BOARD CONSIDERED THE FOLLOWING EVIDENCE:
1. Application for correction of military records (with supporting documents provided, if any).
2. Military Personnel Records and advisory opinions (if any).
THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE:
1. The applicant requests, in effect, that his general discharge be upgraded to an honorable discharge.
2. The applicant states, in effect, he was discharged with a medical condition and he believes his discharge should be reviewed again because he has not held a job because of this condition.
3. The applicant provides no additional documentation in support of his application.
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 applicants military records are not available for review. A fire destroyed approximately 18 million service members records at the National Personnel Records Center in 1973. It is believed that the applicants 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. The available evidence shows that on 18 October 1957 the applicant enlisted in the Regular Army for 3 years, in pay grade E-1. He did not complete advanced individual training; therefore, he was retained in a trainee status.
4. A Psychiatric Report, dated 27 January 1958, shows the applicant was admitted to Fort Ord Army Hospital on 13 January 1958. He was diagnosed as having a schizoid personality, chronic, moderate, manifested by seclusiveness, unrealistic thoughts, and ineffectiveness. This report also shows "Line of Duty, No, existed prior to service." The examining official, an Army medical doctor, opined that at the time the applicant remained in balance and in control; however, if he were to remain in the service he would eventually, and in the very near future, break down and become psychotic. The examining official recommended that the applicant be separated under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-209 (Personnel Separations Discharge Inaptitude or Unsuitability) as rapidly as possible.
5. On 5 February 1958, the applicants unit commander recommended the applicant appear before a Board of Officers. The unit commander stated that the applicant was only present in the company, in a casual status, for approximately 10 days prior to being admitted to Fort Ord Army Hospital on 13 January 1958 for treatment.
6. On 5 February 1958, the applicant acknowledged a review of his case by a Board of Officers and elected not to be represented by counsel.
7. 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. The board recommended that he be discharged from the service due to unsuitability.
8. On 19 February 1958, the convening authority approved the applicants separation from the service under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-209, paragraph 3, and directed the issuance of a general discharge. Accordingly, on 24 February 1958, the applicant was discharged, due to unsuitability, in a trainee status, and in pay grade E-1. He was credited with 4 months and 7 days of net active service.
9. Army Regulation 635-209, in effect at the time, established the policy and provided procedures and guidance for the prompt elimination of enlisted personnel who were determined to be unsuitable for further military service to character and behavior disorders in schizoid, paranoid, and inadequate or asocial personalities. Separation for unsuitability may be accomplished in cases of individuals manifesting such personality patterns when appropriate on the basis of adjustment, behavior, or performance in service. An individual discharged for inaptitude or unsuitability would normally be issued a general discharge.
10. Army Regulation 635-200 (Enlisted Separation) was revised, on 1 December 1976, following settlement of a civil suit. Thereafter, the type of discharge and the character of service were to be determined solely by the individual's military record during the current enlistment. Further, any separation for unsuitability, based on personality disorder must include a diagnosis of a personality disorder made by a physician trained in psychiatry. In connection with these changes a Department of the Army Memorandum, dated 14 January 1977, better known as the Brotzman Memorandum was promulgated. It required retroactive application of revised policies, attitudes, and changes in reviewing applications for the upgrade of discharges based on personality disorders. A second memorandum, dated 8 February 1978, 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 honorable discharge should not be given. Conviction by general court-martial or by more than one special court-martial was determined to be "clear and demonstrable reasons which would justify a less than fully honorable discharge.
DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:
1. The available evidence shows the applicant enlisted in the Regular Army on 18 October 1957 he was admitted to Fort Ord Army Hospital on 13 January 1958. He was diagnosed as having a schizoid personality. The applicant was evaluated by an Army medical doctor and it was recommended that he be separated under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-209, paragraph 3, for unsuitability, because of character and behavior disorders of schizoid personality.
2. The applicant's administrative separation under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-209 by reason of unsuitability was accomplished in compliance with the applicable regulation in effect at the time. However, it now appears the applicants overall service record and his diagnosed character and behavior disorder warrant upgrading his discharge to fully honorable as directed by the above-referenced Army memoranda.
BOARD VOTE:
____X___ ___X____ ___X____ GRANT FULL RELIEF
________ ________ ________ GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF
________ ________ ________ GRANT FORMAL HEARING
________ ________ ________ DENY APPLICATION
BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION:
The Board determined that the evidence presented was sufficient to warrant a recommendation for relief. 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 him an honorable discharge with the same date; and
b. issuing the applicant an Honorable Discharge Certificate with the above date in lieu of the General Discharge Certificate he now holds.
_______ _ _X______ ___
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.
ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20090015123
3
ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
1
ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20090015123
2
ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
1
ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140010502
The applicant requests his general, under honorable conditions discharge be upgraded to honorable. There is no evidence he applied to the Army Discharge Review Board for an upgrade of his discharge within that board's 15-year statute of limitations. As a result, the Board recommends that all Department of the Army records of the individual concerned be corrected by: * issuing the applicant a new DD Form 214 reflecting his character of service as honorable * issuing the applicant an...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2001 | 2001061872C070421
The board determined that the applicant was unsuitable for further military service because of character and behavior disorders and recommended discharge from the service because of unsuitability. The service of a soldier separated for a personality disorder will be characterized as honorable. The applicant’s DD Form 214 should be changed to reflect his character of service as 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 | CY2009 | 20090001108
On 29 November 1957, a psychiatric evaluation was conducted on the applicant and the psychiatrist who performed this examination essentially opined that the applicant was extremely poorly motivated for further military service, that he was not a suitable candidate for rehabilitative efforts, and that he should be presented to a Board of Officers for consideration for separation from the service under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-208 (Unfitness - Frequent Incidents of a Discreditable...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090005185
The applicant requests his general discharge for the period ending 28 September 1962 be upgraded to an honorable discharge and correction of his records to show he was awarded the Army Good Conduct Medal (AGCM). Army Regulation 672-5-1 (Military Awards), in effect at the time, required that throughout a qualifying period of service for award of the AGCM the enlisted person must have had all "excellent" conduct and efficiency ratings and no convictions by a court-martial. As a result, the...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080010764
The applicant requests, in effect, that his general discharge be upgraded to honorable. However, his DD Form 214 shows that he was discharged with a general discharge on 19 March 1958 under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-209 for unsuitability. There is no evidence that the applicant applied to the Army Discharge Review Board for upgrade of his discharge within its 15-year statute of limitations.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090007358
The ADRB case report also confirms that on 3 August 1964, the unit commander initiated action to discharge the applicant from active duty under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-209 (Personnel Separations - Discharge -Unsuitability), by reason of unsuitability (apathy, defective attitude, and inability to expend effort constructively). However, the Brotzman Memorandum requires that the revised provisions of Army Regulation 635-200 be applied retroactively when reviewing applications for...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140003088
The available evidence shows that his discharge proceedings were conducted in accordance with law and regulations applicable at the time. However, the Brotzman Memorandum required that the revised provisions of Army Regulation 635-200 be applied retroactively when reviewing applications for discharge upgrades based on personality disorders (then known as character and behavior disorders). As a result, the Board recommends that all Department of the Army records of the individual concerned...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | 20110011864
The applicant requests upgrade of his general discharge to an honorable discharge. His service record does not indicate he applied to the Army Discharge Review Board for an upgrade of his discharge within its 15-year statute of limitations. The applicant requests an upgrade of his general discharge to an honorable discharge.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080007534
The examiner determined the applicant's condition did not warrant separation from service under the provisions of current medical discharge regulations. The examiner recommended the applicant be separated from the service for unsuitability. The applicant stated that he was not submitting statements in his own behalf and that he waived counsel.