IN THE CASE OF:	  

		BOARD DATE:	    16 June 2011

		DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20100029108 


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 an upgrade of his general discharge to a fully honorable discharge.

2.  The applicant states he was drafted in 1969 and ordered to Fort Lewis, WA.  There was a layover in San Francisco where he experienced a panic attack.  He was transported to a local hospital, treated, and released.  Since he missed his flight to Fort Lewis, he was placed in a holdover area.  As a result of not arriving at Fort Lewis, he was processed as if he were absent without leave (AWOL).  He experienced another panic attack and was again transported to a medical facility for observation.  Once treated and released, he explained his situation and the AWOL processing stopped.  When he arrived at Fort Lewis, he started the testing process and did well enough to be offered training as a helicopter mechanic.  He accepted and he was issued an honorable discharge for the purpose of immediate enlistment in the Regular Army (RA).  He enlisted for 3 years.  However, during basic combat training (BCT), he told his father what had transpired and his father contacted his Congressman.  This started an investigation which led to his removal from training.  He was offered a discharge after the investigation and he accepted.  He has, however, regretted this decision for many years.  He is now older and more mature.  He asks the Board to consider what happened back then and grant him the upgrade.

3.  The applicant provides no additional evidence.


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 applicant's 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 applicant's 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 records show he was inducted into the Army of the United States on 23 July 1969.  He was honorably discharged on 30 July 1969 for the purpose of immediate enlistment in the RA.

3.  He enlisted in the RA for 3 years on 31 July 1969 and he was subsequently reassigned to Company B, 1st Battalion, 2nd BCT Brigade, Fort Lewis, WA, for completion of BCT.

4.  On 28 August 1969, he underwent a mental status evaluation wherein the military psychiatrist indicated that following his induction, the applicant became anxious, not wanting to leave his wife and family.  On his way to his first assignment, he had to be hospitalized.  He had an adult situational reaction manifested by anxiety, nervousness, crying, and depressed mood.  Following his discharge and immediate enlistment, he was transferred to Fort Lewis, WA, where he continued to manifest minimal control of his emotions, cried continuously, and he was always shaking, anxious, and upset.  His chronic anxiety resulted in a complete inability to function in training even at a minimal level.  He was referred for further evaluation and he stated, "I can't take, I can't take the harassment or the pressure.  I feel like I'm going to breakdown completely.  I have to get out."   Although there was no evidence of mental disease or defect, his severe and long-standing character logical deficiencies warranted a psychiatric profile and made it extremely dubious as to whether he could adjust to the military.  The attending psychiatrist recommended the applicant's discharge for unsuitability.

5.  On 9 September 1969, the unit chaplain indicated he consulted with the applicant and he believed the applicant was unsuitable for military service due to his inability to adjust to the military life.  He also recommended his discharge for unsuitability.

6.  On 15 September 1969, his immediate commander notified him of his intent to initiate separation action against him in accordance with Army Regulation 
635-212 (Personnel Separations – Discharge – Unfitness and Unsuitability) by reason of unsuitability.

7.  On 16 September 1969, the applicant acknowledged receipt of the separation memorandum.  He consulted with legal counsel and was advised of the basis for the contemplated separation for unsuitability, the type of discharge and its effect on further enlistment or reenlistment, the possible effects of an undesirable discharge, and of the procedures/rights that were available to him.  He waived consideration of his case by a board of officers, waived personal appearance before a board of officers, and elected not to submit a statement on his own behalf.

8.  He further indicated he understood as a result of the issuance of a discharge under other than honorable conditions, he could be ineligible for many or all benefits as a veteran under both Federal and State laws and he could expect to encounter substantial prejudice in civilian life.

9.  On 12 September 1969, his immediate commander initiated separation action against him in accordance with Army Regulation 635-212 by reason of unsuitability.  The immediate commander indicated the discharge was warranted because of the applicant's apathy and inaptitude (lack of appropriate interest), defective attitude, and inability to expend effort constructively.  The applicant's conduct and efficiency had been unsatisfactory and he had been counseled repeatedly by members of his chain of command.   The immediate commander recommended a general discharge.

10.  On 12 and 18 September 1969, his immediate and intermediate commanders recommended approval of the discharge action with the issuance of a general under honorable conditions character of service.

11.  On 1 October 1969, the separation authority approved the applicant's discharge under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-212 by reason of unsuitability and directed the applicant be furnished a General Discharge Certificate.  The applicant was accordingly discharged on 9 October 1969.

12.  His DD Form 214 (Armed Forces of the United States Report of Transfer or Discharge) confirms he was discharged with a character of service of under honorable conditions (general).  This form further confirms he completed 2 months and 9 days of creditable active military service during this period.

13.  There is no indication he petitioned the Army Discharge Review Board for an upgrade of his discharge within that board's 15-year statute of limitations.

14.  Army Regulation 635-212, then in effect, set forth the policy and procedures for administrative separation of enlisted personnel for unfitness and unsuitability.  When separation for unsuitability was warranted, an honorable or general discharge was issued as determined by the separation authority based upon the individual's entire record.  Paragraph 6b provided that an individual was subject to separation for unsuitability when one or more of the following conditions existed:

* inaptitude
* character and behavior disorders
* apathy (lack of appropriate interest, defective attitudes, and inability to expend effort constructively)
* alcoholism
* enuresis

15.  Army Regulation 635-200 (Active Duty Enlisted Administrative Separations) provides the basic policies and procedures for the separation of enlisted personnel.  Paragraph 3-7a provides that an honorable discharge is a separation with honor and entitles the recipient to benefits provided by law.  The honorable characterization is appropriate when the quality of the member's service generally has met the standards of acceptable conduct and performance of duty for Army personnel or is otherwise so meritorious that any other characterization would be clearly inappropriate.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant contends his discharge should be upgraded.

2.  The evidence of record shows the applicant displayed apathy and inaptitude (lack of appropriate interest), defective attitude, and/or inability to expend effort constructively.  His conduct and efficiency ratings were unsatisfactory and he failed to respond positively to counseling by members of his chain of command.  Accordingly, his chain of command initiated separation action against him.

3.  All requirements of law and regulation were met and the rights of the applicant were fully protected throughout the separation process.  His discharge was appropriate because the quality of his service was not consistent with the Army standards of acceptable personal conduct and performance of duty by military personnel.

4.  Based on his overall record of service, the applicant's service did not meet the standards of acceptable conduct and performance of duty for Army personnel.  Therefore, there is insufficient evidence to grant the applicant the requested relief.

BOARD VOTE:

________  ________  ________  GRANT FULL RELIEF 

________  ________  ________  GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF 

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

____X___  ___X___  ___X____  DENY APPLICATION

BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION:

The evidence presented does not demonstrate the existence of a probable error or injustice.  Therefore, the Board determined the overall merits of this case are insufficient as a basis for correction of the records of the individual concerned.



      _______ _   _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)                                         AR20100029108



3


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20100029108



5


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1