IN THE CASE OF:	  

		BOARD DATE:	  9 August 2012

		DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20120002181 


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, the sister of a deceased former service member (FSM), requests that the FSM's discharge be upgraded from under other than honorable conditions to a general discharge.

2.  The applicant states the FSM's service to his country was the high point of his life.  While he was in the service, a personal tragedy occurred, his children were murdered.  This appears to have led to him going absent without leave (AWOL) and his subsequent mental illness, which he suffered for the rest of his life.  His family wants him to be buried at a National Cemetery.  An attempt was made to investigate the murder of his children and the dates appear to coincide with his AWOL status.

3.  The applicant provides:

* DD Form 214 (Armed Forces of the United States Report of Transfer or Discharge) 
* DA Form 20 (Enlisted Qualification Record)
* DA Form 24 (Service Record)
* Certificate of Death
* Birth Certificate
* Power of Attorney
* Two DD Forms 149 (Application for Correction of Military Record)
* Standard Form 180 (Request Pertaining to Military Records)
* Five letters

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  The FSM's records show he enlisted in the Regular Army on 31 May 1962 and he held military occupational specialty 112.07 (Heavy Weapons Infantryman).  He was awarded the Parachutist Badge and the Marksman Marksmanship Qualification Badge with Rifle Bar.

2.  He received nonjudicial punishment (NJP) under the provisions of Article 15, Uniform Code of Military Justice, on 20 December 1963, for being AWOL from 1 to 9 December 1963.

3.  On 15 June 1964, the FSM was convicted by a special court-martial of one specification each of being AWOL from his assigned unit from 1 to 9 May 1964 and 14 to 18 May 1964.  He was sentenced to a forfeiture of $40.00 pay for 6 months and confinement for 6 months.

4.  On 13 July 1964, the FSM completed a Standard Form 89 (Report of Medical History) wherein he annotated:

	a.  block 18 (Family History) that his spouse - age 19, and his three children - ages 3, 2, and 8 months, were all in "good" health.

	b.  block 20 (Have You Ever Had or Have You Now) "No" to indicate he never suffered from "depression or excessive worry" or "nervous trouble of any sort."

	c.  this form by placing his signature in the appropriate block.

5.  There is no evidence in the FSM's available record that shows he was ever diagnosed with or treated for any mental disorder/illness while on active duty. 

6.  The specific facts and circumstances surrounding the FSM’s discharge processing are not available for review with this case.  However, the DD Form 214 he was issued confirms he was discharged on 25 September 1964, under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-208 (Personnel Separations – Discharge – Unfitness) by reason of unfitness - frequent incidents of a discreditable nature, with an under other than honorable conditions characterization of service.  He completed 1 year, 11 months, and 25 days of net active service with 120 days of lost time due to being AWOL and in confinement. 

7.  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.

8.  Army Regulation 635-208, in effect at the time, contained the policy and outlined the procedures for separating individuals for unfitness.  It provided that individuals would be discharged by reason of unfitness when it was clearly established that despite attempts to develop him as a satisfactory Soldier, further effort was unlikely to succeed, rehabilitation was impracticable, and the individual was not amenable to rehabilitation.  This regulation prescribed that an individual discharged for unfitness would be furnished an undesirable discharge, except when an honorable or a general discharge was warranted by the particular circumstances.

9.  Army Regulation 635-200 (Active Duty Enlisted Administrative Separations), 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.

10.  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 evidence of record shows the FSM appears to have demonstrated he could not or would not meet acceptable standards required of enlisted personnel as evidenced by his NJP and court-martial conviction, which were both for being AWOL.  Accordingly, his immediate commander initiated separation action against him.

2.  His record is void of the complete facts and circumstances surrounding his discharge action.  However, his DD Form 214 shows he was discharged under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-208, for unfitness - frequent incidents of a discreditable nature.

3.  In the absence of evidence to the contrary, it is presumed his separation processing was accomplished in compliance with applicable regulations with no indication of procedural errors which would have jeopardized his rights.  The type of discharge directed and the reason for discharge were appropriate considering the available facts of the case.

4.  The applicant contends the death of the FSM's children may have contributed to him going AWOL and subsequently to his mental illness.  However, records show the FSM confirmed that his children were in good health when he returned from being AWOL just 2 months prior to his discharge action.  There is no evidence in the available record and the applicant has not provided any evidence that shows the FSM suffered from, or was treated for, a mental disorder/illness during his active service.  

5.  The ABCMR does not grant requests for discharge upgrades solely for the purpose of making a person eligible for VA or other benefits.  Every case is individually decided based upon its merits.

6.  Based on the FSM's overall record, his service clearly did not meet the standards of acceptable conduct of duty for Army personnel.  Therefore, he is not entitled to an honorable or a general discharge.

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 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)                                         AR20120002181



3


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20120002181



4


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1