PROCEEDINGS IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 25 February 1998 DOCKET NUMBER: AC97-09930 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 following members, a quorum, were present: Examiner The applicant and counsel if any, did not appear before the Board. 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) FINDINGS: 1. The applicant has exhausted or the Board has waived the requirement for exhaustion of all administrative remedies afforded by existing law or regulations. 2. The applicant requests, in effect, that his dishonorable discharge (DD) be upgraded to honorable and contends that a DD was inappropriate given the fact he was allowed to reenlist for a subsequent period of service for which he ultimately received an honorable discharge (HD). 3. On 20 October 1944 the applicant was inducted into the Army of the United States for the duration of the war plus 6 months. At the time of his induction the applicant was 19 years of age. 4. On 4 January 1946 the applicant was adjudged guilty of violating Articles 61 and 96 of the Articles of War dated 14 December 1945. The charges consisted of his being AWOL from the stockade from 14 December through 20 December 1945, braking parole at the stockade, and taking a government vehicle without authorization. He was sentenced to receive a DD which was suspended until he completed his confinement, to forfeit all pay and allowances, and to be confined at hard labor for 3 years. 5. On 29 October 1946 the DD was executed and the applicant was issued a WD AGO Form 53.57 (Enlisted Record and Report of Separation/Dishonorable Discharge) after completing 2 years and 10 days of active military service and accruing 359 days of lost time due to AWOL and confinement. 6. On 30 October 1946, while still in Wurzburg, Germany, the applicant was released from confinement and honorably restored to active duty. The unexecuted portion of his sentence pertaining to confinement and forfeiture were remitted, and he executed his restoration to active duty by enlisting in the Regular Army for a period of 18 months. 7. On 24 May 1948 the applicant completed his service and was issued a WD AGO Form 53 (Enlisted Record of and Report of Separation/Honorable Discharge), with the narrative reason for discharge cited as expiration of term of service, after completing 1 year, 5 months, and 29 days of active military service for that period of service. 8. On 6 July 1948 the Army Board of Correction of Military Records (ABCMR) rendered a decision that determined the execution of DD’s, in the cases of general prisoners who were restored to active duty between 1 August and 30 November 1946, was an injustice. The ABCMR directed that in these cases a WD AGO Form 56 (Discharge from the Army of the United States/Blue) be issued in lieu of the DD’s issued and on 10 July 1948 The Secretary of the Army approved the ABCMR decision. 9. On 21 March 1949 the applicant was issued an WD AGO Form 459 (Undesirable Discharge Certificate/(UD), in lieu of the DD originally issued on 29 October 1946. This was accomplished after the Office of the Adjutant General determined that the WD AGO Form 56 (Blue discharge) was obsolete and that a UD would be an appropriate substitute for the individuals covered by the original ABCMR decision. 10. The “Blue” Discharge was issued to individuals whose service was not dishonorable but who were not entitled to a “testimonial of honest and faithful service” as indicated by an honorable discharge. On 16 December 1944 a policy revision of the Blue discharge (WD AGO Form 56) was announced, due to the exigencies of war, which eliminated character of service as a separation criteria. This is the policy governing “Blue Discharges” in effect on the date the applicant was issued his original DD. CONCLUSIONS: 1. The applicant’s discharge appears to be in accordance with law, regulation, and the interpretation of the ABCMR decision applicable at the time. 2. The Board notes that the applicant, once honorably restored to active duty, served honorably until the expiration of his term of service and was issued an HD. 3. Had the original ABCMR decision to issue restored prisoners a “Blue Discharge” in lieu of a DD, been accomplished, the applicant’s service would not have been characterized as undesirable. 4. Considering the circumstances surrounding this case, and taking cognizance of the time elapsed since the discharge, the applicant’s subsequent honorable service, and the original ABCMR decision, it appears that the interest of justice would be best served by changing the applicant’s UD to a general discharge (GD). 5. In view of the foregoing, it would be appropriate to correct the applicant’s records, but only as recommended below. RECOMMENDATION: 1. That all of the Department of the Army records related to this case be corrected by showing that the individual concerned was separated from the service with a general discharge on 29 October 1946. 2. That the Department of the Army issue to the individual concerned a General Discharge Certificate from the Army of the United States, dated 29 October 1946, in lieu of the UD now held by him. 3. That so much of the application as is in excess of the foregoing be denied. BOARD VOTE: GRANT AS STATED IN RECOMMENDATION GRANT FORMAL HEARING DENY APPLICATION CHAIRPERSON