IN THE CASE OF:
BOARD DATE: 14 September 2013
DOCKET NUMBER: AR20130002572
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 that his general discharge be upgraded to an honorable discharge.
2. The applicant states he was placed in a detention company while in basic training for no justified reason. He injured his back at his initial site of basic training at Fort Lewis, Washington, and at the detention company and he was discharged during advanced individual training (AIT) for his back injury.
3. The applicant provides a copy of his DD Form 214 (Armed Forces of the United States Report of Transfer or Discharge) and copies of civilian medical treatment records.
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 enlisted in the Regular Army on 1 December 1970 for a period of 3 years and training as a combat engineer. He was transferred to Fort Lewis, Washington, to undergo his basic training. The applicant was recycled three times and was assigned to a special training company (STC).
3. On 19 March 1971, nonjudicial punishment (NJP) was imposed against him for being absent without leave (AWOL) from 3 March to 19 March 1971.
4. On 17 April 1971, NJP was imposed against him for being AWOL from 4 April to 15 April 1971.
5. On 28 May 1971, he was convicted by a summary court-martial of being AWOL from 17 April to 11 May 1971.
6. On 14 July 1971, he underwent a psychiatric evaluation and was diagnosed as having an immature personality, chronic, moderate, manifested by anxiety, passive-aggressive behavior and inability to adjust to military life. The examining official indicated that the applicant had been recycled three times and spent 6 months in STC. He has been on sick call numerous times, has little motivation for finishing basic training, and does not understand why the military wants him. He complains that when he is under stress he gets nervous and agitated and feels like he is going to fall apart. He insists that he is unable to adapt to the Army and lacks any foresight into his future goals. He was given the opportunity to ventilate, supportive therapy, and was returned to duty.
7. On 28 September 1971, he was transferred to Fort Leonard Wood, Missouri, to undergo his advanced individual training (AIT) as a combat engineer.
8. On 14 October 1971, NJP was imposed against him for failure to go to his place of duty on 12 October 1971.
9. On 17 November 1971, he again underwent a psychiatric evaluation and was diagnosed as having a Passive-Aggressive Personality Disorder, Severe. The examining psychiatrist opined that given his past record of performance and avowed intentions of not wanting to complete his AIT made him a poor candidate for the Armys purposes and recommended that the applicant be separated from the service.
10. On 22 November 1971, the applicants commander notified him that he was initiating action to discharge him from the service under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-212 (Personnel Separations-Discharge-Unfitness and Unsuitability) for unsuitability.
11. After consulting with defense counsel the applicant waived all of his rights and elected not to submit a statement in his own behalf.
12. On 1 December 1971, the applicant met with the battalion commander and informed him that he could not get along with people, especially anyone trying to tell him what to do. He gets very tense and nervous under these conditions and has to go AWOL and just hitch-hikes around. He stated that it would be best for all concerned if he were discharged. The battalion commander recommended that he be issued a General Discharge Certificate.
13. The appropriate authority approved the recommendation for discharge on 3 December 1971 and directed that he be furnished a General Discharge Certificate.
14. Accordingly, he was discharged under honorable conditions on 15 December 1971 under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-212 for unsuitability.
15. At the time the applicant underwent his separation physical/medical examination, he indicated that he had foot and back problems. Upon completion of his examination the physician declared that he was fit for retention or separation.
16. There is no evidence in the available records to show that he applied to the Army Discharge Review Board for an upgrade of his discharge within that boards 15-year statute of limitations.
17. Army Regulation 635-212, in effect at the time, set forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel for unsuitability due to apathy, inaptitude, character and behavior disorders and alcoholism. It provided, in part, that members who displayed an apathetic attitude towards their service obligations and/or military authorities were subject to separation for unsuitability. Although an honorable or general discharge was authorized, an undesirable discharge was normally considered appropriate.
DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:
1. The applicant's administrative separation was accomplished in compliance with applicable regulations with no indication of procedural errors, which would tend to jeopardize his rights.
2. Accordingly, the type of discharge directed and the reasons therefore were appropriate under the circumstances.
3. The applicants contentions and supporting documents have been noted by the Board and while they are not supported by either evidence submitted with his application or the evidence of record, they are also not sufficiently mitigating to warrant relief when compared to his otherwise undistinguished record of service during such a short period of time. His overall record of misconduct provided clear and demonstrable reasons why a fully honorable discharge was not, and is not now, appropriate. His service simply does not rise to the level of a fully honorable discharge and he did not then or now provide sufficient mitigating circumstances to explain his conduct at the time.
4. Accordingly, there appears to be no basis to grant his request for an upgrade of his discharge to fully honorable.
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) AR20130002572
3
ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
1
ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20130002572
2
ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
1
ARMY | BCMR | CY2001 | 2001054116C070420
EVIDENCE OF RECORD : The applicant's military records show: Service members discharged for unsuitability would be furnished an honorable or general discharge. The record does not substantiate the applicant's contention that he was denied any training for which he had enlisted.
ARMY | BCMR | CY1996 | 9607515C070209
The applicant was assigned to Fort Dix for basic training. A 25 January 1971 report of medical examination indicates that the applicant was medically qualified for discharge with a physical profile of 1 1 1 1 1 1. 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.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002076789C070215
On 18 September 1968, the applicant’s commander submitted a request to have the applicant rehabilitatively transferred to another unit. The applicant’s commander initiated a recommendation to discharge the applicant from the service for unsuitability due to a character and behavior disorder, under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-212, on 30 April 1969. That all of the Department of the Army records related to this case be corrected by showing that the individual concerned was...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2006 | 20060010277
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 8 February 2007 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20060010277 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. The applicant requests that his discharge be changed from general (under honorable conditions) to an honorable discharge. As a result, the Board recommends that all Department of the Army records of the individual...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080010718
On 7 December 1971, the appropriate authority approved the applicant's discharge for unsuitability under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-212 for character and behavior disorder and directed issuance of a General Discharge Certificate. 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. As a result, the Board recommends that all Department of the Army records of the individual...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090015227
On 19 November 1971, the defense counsel stated that the applicant was diagnosed in Vietnam with a character and behavior disorder and a civilian psychiatric report confirmed the diagnosis. The ADRB noted that on 22 October 1970 the applicant was diagnosed with a character and behavior disorder and based on the requirements of Army Regulation 635-212, as stated by his defense counsel; he should have received a General Discharge Certificate. In spite of this, the evidence of record shows...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2012 | 20120011418
He did not report until 6 May 1970 and NJP was imposed against him for that absence. On 1 August 1970, he was transferred to Fort Lewis, WA. However, his record contains a DD Form 214 that shows he was discharged on 8 September 1971 under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-212 (Personnel Separations Discharge Unfitness and Unsuitability) for unfitness due to an established pattern of shirking, with issuance of an Undesirable Discharge Certificate.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080006207
The military psychiatrists further stated that the applicants character was consistent with his life history and behavior. With respect to the applicants medical discharge, there is no evidence in the available records and the applicant did not submit any substantiating evidence that shows he was issued a permanent medical profile or that he underwent a medical evaluation board (MEB) or a physical evaluation board (PEB). The Army must find that a Soldier is physically unfit to reasonably...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2007 | 20070006667
The applicant states, in effect, that he believes the record to be unjust in that the separating officials failed to take into consideration the medical/mental condition he was in at the time he went AWOL (absent without leave), which was the primary consideration in the determination for and time for discharge. He states that on several occasions, he had previously been diagnosed as having a "Passive-Aggressive Personality Disorder" and "Latent Schizophrenia" and there was no record or...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002067588C070402
Accordingly, the applicant was discharged under honorable conditions (a general discharge) on 19 August 1969 under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-212 for unsuitability due to character and behavior disorders. On 6 January 1971 and on 16 June 1980, the Army Discharge Review Board denied the applicant’s requests for a discharge upgrade to honorable. That the Department issue to her an Honorable Discharge Certificate, dated 19 August 1969, in lieu of the general discharge of the same...