MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:       

	BOARD DATE:           4 December 2001
DOCKET NUMBER:   AR2001058200

	I certify that hereinafter is recorded the record of consideration of the Army Board for Correction of Military Records in the case of the above-named individual.

	Mr. Carl W. S. Chun		Director	
	Ms. Rosa M. Chandler		Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Ms. JoAnn H. Langston		Chairperson	
	Ms. Margaret K. Patterson		Member	
	Mr. Eric N. Andersen		Member	

	The Board, established pursuant to authority contained in 10 U.S.C. 1552, convened at the call of the Chairperson on the above date.  In accordance with Army Regulation 15-185, the application and the available military records pertinent to the corrective action requested were reviewed to determine whether to authorize a formal hearing, recommend that the records be corrected without a formal hearing, or to deny the application without a formal hearing if it is determined that insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate the existence of probable material error or injustice.

	The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein.

	The Board considered the following evidence:

	Exhibit A - Application for correction of military 
                records
	Exhibit B - Military Personnel Records (including
	            advisory opinion, if any)

APPLICANT REQUESTS:  That his undesirable discharge (UD) be upgraded to a fully honorable discharge.

APPLICANT STATES:  In effect, that as an 18-year old enlistee, he was suffering from post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) that inhibited him from functioning properly in the Army.  He states that his biological father was a homosexual Baptist minister who brought men into the home for sexual liaisons. His father's homosexuality was uncovered, he was defrocked, and abandoned his family when the applicant was 4 years old.  When he was 9 years old, his mother remarried to a younger man who was a pedophile.  For approximately 3 years, the stepfather sexually abused him.  When his mother interceded on his behalf, the sexual abuse stopped, however, " . . . covet abuse continued" until he joined the Army.  After his stint in the Army, he entered therapy.  He now realizes that during his military service, he was suffering from PTSD caused by his victimization as a child.  Since leaving the military, he has given up several jobs because of his inability to cope.  Over the years, he has sought both group and individual therapy.  He is now 59 years old and through the course of his treatments has become aware that being absent without leave (AWOL) was behavior that was related to PTSD.

In support of his application, he submits:  a letter from a certified addictions professional, dated 6 October 1999; a letter from the Health Care Management Division, Broward County Department of Human Services, Fort Lauderdale, Florida, dated 29 November 1999, which includes an intake form and an on-going narrative of case activity.  He also submits:  a letter from a licensed mental health counselor, dated 6 July 2000; a letter from a group and individual therapist in DelRay Beach, Florida, dated 18 August 2000; a letter from a Ph.D. in addiction and pastoral counseling in Fort Lauderdale, Florida, dated 21 September 2000; and a letter from a psychiatrist in Fort Lauderdale, dated 23 February 2001.  He submits several letters and certificates to show that he has an exemplary work history and a police records search for the city of Hollywood, Florida, dated 12 June 2000, which indicates he has no police record in Hollywood, Florida.

EVIDENCE OF RECORD:  The applicant's military records show:

He was born on 7 February 1942 and enlisted in the Regular Army for 3 years on 6 September 1960.  He was trained in military occupational specialty (MOS) 111.00 (Light Weapons Infantryman).  On 3 February 1961, he was assigned to Germany. 

The applicant was AWOL from his unit from 23-25 July 1961.  He was tried and convicted of this offense by a summary court-martial on 31 July 1961.  He went AWOL twice more (on 12 August and 19-20 August 1961) and was again tried 

and convicted by summary courts-martial on 15 and 22 August 1961.  As a result of his three convictions, he was sentenced to reduction from pay grade E-3 to pay grade E-1, forfeiture of pay, and confinement at hard labor for 1 month.

On 17 October 1961, the applicant was promoted to pay grade E-2 and on 15 December 1961, he was again promoted to pay grade E-3.

Between February and June 1962, nonjudicial punishment (NJP) action was imposed against the applicant under the provisions of Article 15, Uniform Code of Military Justice, on three separate occasions.  On 8 February 1962, NJP was imposed against him for missing formation (guard duty) on 2 February 1962.  His punishment included 7 days restriction.  On 15 February 1962, NJP was imposed against him for being AWOL from his unit on 14 February 1962.  His punishment included 14 days extra duty.  On 17 February 1962, NJP was imposed against him for disobeying a direct order from a noncommissioned officer on the same date.  His punishment included reduction from pay grade 
E-3 to pay grade E-2.

On 27 February 1962, the applicant was convicted by a summary court-martial of failing to go to his place of duty on 17 February 1962.  He was sentenced to 30 days' restriction.

On 9 March 1962, the applicant was convicted by a special court-martial of failing to go to his place of duty on 24 and 25 February 1962.  He was sentenced to confinement at hard labor for 2 months, reduction from pay grade E-2 to pay grade E-1, and to forfeiture of $55.00 pay per month for 2 months.

On 14 May 1962, the applicant was promoted to pay grade E-2 and on 9 June 1962, he was promoted to pay grade E-3.

On 19 June 1962, NJP was imposed against the applicant for being AWOL from his unit on 18 June 1962.  His punishment included 18 days' restriction.

On 6 July 1962, the applicant was convicted by a summary court-martial of being absent from his unit on 3 July 1962.  He was sentenced to forfeiture of $30.00 pay for 1 month and to confinement at hard labor for 1 month.

On 25 July 1962, the applicant underwent a medical examination which found him qualified for separation.

On 28 July 1962, the applicant underwent a mental status evaluation by professionally trained personnel.  He was determined to suffer from “passive aggressive reaction."  The examining official stated that the applicant was considered for an administrative separation in 1961; however, he was given a rehabilitative transfer.  He continued to act out in a discreditable fashion.  Although he was determined to have excellent potential for performing well in the service, he had no apparent motivation for further military service.  He was labeled as an immature, impulsive, self-centered, negativistic and passive-aggressive individual.  Further, he was determined not to be insane and to possess sufficient mental capacity to know the difference between right and wrong and to adhere to the right and refrain from wrong.  He was considered to be mentally responsible for his acts.  His character behavior disorder was not amenable to hospitalization, treatment, disciplinary action, training, transfer to another unit or station, or classification to another type of duty.  He had no medical disease or defect which warranted disposition through medical channels. He had the mental capacity to understand the nature of board proceedings and he was able to cooperate in his own defense.  The mental status evaluation recommended separation under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-208.

On an unknown date, the applicant's commander recommended elimination for unfitness under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-208.  The action was returned due to administrative discrepancies.  The discrepancies were resolved and on 8 August 1962, the applicant waived his rights to a hearing before a board of officers.  He also waived representation by counsel and declined to submit a statement in his own behalf.  

On 30 August 1962, the appropriate authority approved the recommendation and directed the issuance of a UD for unfitness under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-208, due to frequent incidents of a discreditable nature with civil or military authorities.  

On 6 September 1962, the applicant authenticated a statement with his own signature which indicated that he had received a copy of his elimination proceedings.

On 19 September 1962, the applicant was discharged under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-208, for unfitness, with a UD.  He had completed 1 year, 
9 months and 16 days of active military service and he had 89 days lost time due to being AWOL and in confinement.

There is no evidence that the applicant ever applied to the Army Discharge Review Board for review of his discharge under that board's 15 year statute of limitations.  

Army Regulation 635-208, in effect at the time set forth the basic authority for administrative separation for unfitness (misconduct).  Action to separate an individual was to be taken when, in the judgement of the commander, it was clearly established that rehabilitation was impractical or was unlikely to produce a satisfactory soldier.  When separation for unfitness was warranted, a UD was normally issued.
DISCUSSION:  Considering all the evidence, allegations, and information presented by the applicant, together with the evidence of record, applicable law and regulations, it is concluded:

1.  In order to justify correction of a military record the applicant must show to the satisfaction of the Board, or it must otherwise satisfactorily appear, that the record is in error or unjust.  The applicant has failed to submit evidence that would satisfy this requirement.

2.  The applicant’s administrative separation was accomplished in compliance with applicable regulations with no indication of procedural errors that would have jeopardized his rights.  In view of the applicant's numerous acts of willful indiscipline, it does not appear that his UD was too severe.

3.  The Board has noted the many documents provided by the applicant concerning his abusive childhood and empathizes with him.  However, the mental status evaluation done by the Army prior to his separation indicates that, notwithstanding his traumatic childhood, the applicant had the ability to know right from wrong and the ability to make the right choices.

4.  In view of the foregoing, there is no basis for granting the applicant's request.

DETERMINATION:  The applicant has failed to submit sufficient relevant evidence to demonstrate the existence of probable error or injustice.

BOARD VOTE:

________  ________  ________  GRANT

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

_JHL____  __MKP__  ___ENA _  DENY APPLICATION

						
		    Carl W. S. Chun
		    Director, Army Board for Correction
    of Military Records

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2000037046	
SUFFIX		
RECON		
DATE BOARDED	20011204	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE	(UD)	
DATE OF DISCHARGE	19650503	
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY	AR635-208  	
DISCHARGE REASON	A51.00	
BOARD DECISION	(DENY)	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.	144.5000	
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.