IN THE CASE OF:	

		BOARD DATE:	28 June 2011

		DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20100029943 


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 reconsideration of his previous request for upgrade of his undesirable discharge to a general discharge.

2.  The applicant states that at his separation he was diagnosed with Passive Dependency Disorder and he was never offered any counseling or help to overcome the disorder.  Instead of his superiors reaching out to him they decided to punish him.  He was only 17 years old when he went into the Army and he was dependent upon the support of his parents to make proper decisions and how to operate correctly in society.  Instead of his superiors offering him help they racially profiled him.   He believes he was not offered help and support because of his race.  His superiors were all Caucasians and they could not have understood the environment that he came from or his dependence on his family for support and help.

3.  The applicant provides:

* a "physhiatryonline.com" extract describing personality disorders
* the 1st and 2d Endorsements to a Request for Physical and Psychiatric Examination, dated 17 July 1964
* his DD Form 214 (Report of Transfer or Discharge)


CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  Incorporated herein by reference are military records which were summarized in the previous consideration of the applicant's case by the Army Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR) in Docket Number AR20090008042, on 15 October 2009.

2.  Army Regulation 15-185 sets forth procedures for processing requests for correction of military records.  Paragraph 2-15b governs requests for reconsideration.  This provision of the regulation allows an applicant to request reconsideration of an earlier ABCMR decision if the request is received within one year of the ABCMR's original decision and it has not previously been reconsidered.  This request for reconsideration is being considered as an exception to policy.

3.  The applicant has presented a new argument concerning the medical diagnosis he received at the time of his separation which is new evidence that warrants consideration by the Board.

4.  The previous Record of Proceedings (ROP) noted:

	a.  On 12 April 1963, at 17 years and 10 months of age, he enlisted in the Regular Army for 3 years.  He completed his initial training, to include the Basic Airborne Course.  He was awarded military occupational specialty (MOS) 940.00 (Cook).

	b.  On 21 September 1963, he was assigned for duty as a cook with A Troop, 17th Cavalry Regiment, 82nd Airborne Division, Fort Bragg, NC.

	c.  On 18 October 1963, the applicant accepted nonjudicial punishment (NJP) under the provisions of Article 15, Uniform Code of Military Justice, for being absent without leave (AWOL) for 13 days.

	d.  On 9 January 1964, the applicant was convicted by a special court-martial of being AWOL for 2 days and of breaking restriction.

	e.  On 24 January 1964, the applicant was convicted by a special court-martial of failing to go at the time prescribed to his appointed place of duty (four specifications) and for being AWOL for 3 days.

	f.  On 13 February 1964, the applicant was barred to reenlistment based on his record of habitual misconduct.
	g.  His DA Form 24 (Service Record) shows in Section 6 (Time Lost) nine separate entries for AWOL, including two incidents of confinement.

	h.  On 29 June 1964, the applicant was convicted by a special court-martial of being AWOL from 15 May to 22 June 1964.

	i.  On 17 July 1964, the applicant’s unit commander initiated separation under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-208 (Personnel Separations-Discharge-Unfitness) for unfitness.  The commander stated that the applicant had indicated he could not remain in the service with his domestic problems and he desired to get out of the Army any way he could.  The battalion commander stated that the applicant had received one NJP, three special court-martial convictions, and one summary court-martial conviction.  Numerous attempts had been made in his former and present unit to help him rehabilitate.

	j.  The applicant received legal counseling and waived consideration of his case by a board of officers, waived a personal appearance, waived representation by counsel, and declined to submit a statement in his own behalf.

	k.  On 1 August 1964, the appropriate authority approved the applicant's separation under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-208 for unfitness with an Undesirable Discharge Certificate.  On 19 August 1964, the applicant was discharged accordingly.  He completed 11 months and 26 days of total active duty service with 132 days of time lost due to AWOL and confinement.

5.  The 2d Endorsement to the Request for Physical and Psychiatric Examination from the Mental Hygiene Consultation Service, Fort Bragg, states that the applicant was examined by that service.  They concurred there were no disqualifying mental defects sufficient to warrant disposition through medical channels.  The applicant was and is mentally responsible, both to distinguish right from wrong and to adhere to the right, and he had the mental capacity to understand and participate in board proceedings.  It further stated that this enlisted man has shown an inability to settle family problems, which led to poor Soldiering.  His diagnosis was "Passive Dependent."  He was recommended for separation under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-208 because of unfitness or Army Regulation 635-209 for unsuitability due to personality disorder.  The endorsement was signed by a Medical Corps, Psychiatrist captain.

6.  The applicant's medical records are not available for review.  There is no evidence of record and the applicant did not provide any evidence to support his claim of racial profiling or that he was not offered or provided proper medical or mental health treatment or counseling.


7.  Army Regulation 635-208, then in effect, set forth the basic authority for separation of enlisted personnel for unfitness.  The regulation stated that individuals would be discharged by reason of unfitness with an undesirable discharge, unless the particular circumstances in a given case warranted a general or honorable discharge, when it had been determined that an individual's military record was characterized by one or more of the following:  (a) frequent incidents of a discreditable nature with civil or military authorities; (b) sexual perversion including but not limited to lewd and lascivious acts, indecent exposure, indecent acts with or assault upon a child, or other indecent acts or offenses; (c) drug addiction or the unauthorized use or possession of habit-forming narcotic drugs or marijuana; (d) an established pattern for shirking; or (e) an established pattern showing dishonorable failure to pay just debts.

8.  Army Regulation 635-200 governs the 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.

9.  Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 3-7b, provides that a general discharge is a separation from the Army under honorable conditions.  When authorized, it is issued to a Soldier whose military record is satisfactory but not sufficiently meritorious to warrant an honorable discharge.  

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant's contention that his discharge should be upgraded because he was diagnosed with a Passive Personality Disorder has been noted.  The evaluating psychiatrist recommended him for separation under either Army Regulation 635-208 for unfitness or Army Regulation 635-209 for unsuitability due to personality disorder.  Based on the applicant's extensive record of misconduct his chain of command opted to process him for discharge for unfitness.  As a result, he was duly discharged with an undesirable discharge.
 
2.  The applicant has not provided any new documentation or convincing argument concerning his desire to have his discharge upgraded.  The available evidence of record shows his administrative separation was accomplished in 
compliance with applicable regulations with no indication of procedural errors.  Based on his record of indiscipline, the type of discharge directed and the reason therefore were appropriate considering all the facts of the case.

3.  In view of the foregoing, there is no basis for granting the applicant's 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 that the overall merits of this case are insufficient as a basis to amend the decision of the ABCMR set forth in Docket Number AR20090008042, dated 15 October 2009.



      ____________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)                                         AR20100027392



3


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20100029943



2


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1