| Loren G. Harrell | Director | ||
| Deborah L. Brantley | Analyst |
| Ms. Irene N. Wheelwright | Chairperson | ||
| Mr. Thomas N. Kuhn | Member | ||
| Ms. Karen L. Wolff | Member |
2. The applicant requests that his undesirable discharge be upgraded to honorable. He states, in effect, when he returned to the United States from overseas he commenced a 30 day period of leave. At the conclusion of his leave he notes he became ill, was told by his physician not to travel and requested an extension of his leave from his gaining command. The applicant states that his gaining command had no record of his assignment and instructed him to wait at home for further guidance. When the war ended several months later he concluded his services were no longer required and assumed that was why he had never heard from the Army with new reporting instructions. In 1951 he was apprehended and returned to military control. Although he was initially confined he was ultimately released and assigned administrative duties while an investigation into his status was initiated. The investigation ultimately concluded they were unable to determine his exact date of AWOL and hence he could not be remanded for trial. Instead he was separated with an undesirable discharge, unaware that the character of his separation would deny him future veteran benefits.
3. Although the applicant’s military personnel file is no longer available information reconstructed from alternative sources, including a copy of the 1951 AWOL/Desertion investigation file, indicates the applicant entered active duty on 10 April 1943 and served 18 months in the European Theater of Operations where he participated in two designated campaign periods and attained the grade of private first class.
4. According to the applicant he returned to the United States in July 1945 and admitted he had been AWOL since that time. An extract from the 31st Quartermaster Training Company, dated 28 November 1945, notes he was released from attached/unassigned and “dropped from strength accountability” on 28 November 1945.
5. On 22 January 1951 he was apprehended and returned to military control at Selfridge Air Force Base and ultimately transferred to Fort Custer, Michigan. An investigation into his absence was launched and by July 1951 the commander, Fort Custer concluded there was “no documentary evidence available concerning the initial date of absence” and as such recommended the applicant be discharged under the provisions of Army Regulation 615-366 (desertion), noting “trial barred by Article 43” UCMJ. The commander recommended an undesirable discharge.
6. However, the applicant was not discharged and the investigation was reopened. By January 1952 it was again concluded “that insufficient evidence has been uncovered…to establish a corpus delicti which would be needed to support a charge of absence without leave.”
7. On 15 February 1952 the applicant’s discharge under the provisions of Army Regulation 615-366 was directed and on 29 February 1952, more than a year after his apprehension, he was issued an undesirable discharge. Documents contained in the investigation file indicate the applicant was in a “duty status” during the period of his investigation and his separation report reflects that he was awarded an Army Good Conduct. His separation document indicates he was separated as a private first class with his original date of rank of February 1945 and there is no indication he was reduced in grade prior to his separation. At the time of his separation he had 3 years, 5 months, and 27 days of active Federal service and nearly 1900 days of lost time.
8. Army Regulation 615-366, in effect at that time, set forth the policy and procedures for separation of enlisted personnel for misconduct including aggravated AWOL and for desertion and physical unfitness. Section II of that regulation stated that individuals whose trial was barred upon return to military control would be restored to duty by the commanding general of the service command or other officer exercising either special or general court-martial jurisdiction, if that individual was physically and mentally fit for the performance of military service. If the individual was physically or mentally unfit for military service the enlisted soldier would be discharged by reason of desertion and physical unfitness. An undesirable discharge was considered appropriate.
CONCLUSIONS:
1. While the applicant admits that he was AWOL the evidence of record indicates that while he was under military control he performed satisfactorily and was in fact ultimately awarded an Army Good Conduct Medal and never reduced in rank.
2. The evidence indicates that when he was apprehended in 1951 he was initially confined but was released and assigned duties as a clerk for more than a year while the Army investigated his status. His assignment of duties is an indication that he was physically and mentally fit to perform such duties. He was, in effect, restored to duty.
3. The Board notes that separation under the provisions of Army Regulation 615-366 required that the individual would be discharged when “physically or mentally unfit for military service” and in the absence of such unfitness would be restored to duty. The evidence indicates that the applicant’s separation under Army 615-366 appears to have been in error.
4. His ability to “soldier on” in spite of his situation supports a conclusion that he was not an “undesirable” soldier and his award of the Army Good Conduct Medal, and the fact that he was not reduced at the time of his administrative discharge, supports a conclusion that his service was in fact honorable.
5. In view of the foregoing, the applicant’s records should be corrected as recommended below.
RECOMMENDATION:
That all of the Department of the Army records related to this case be corrected:
a. by voiding the undesirable separation issued on 29 February 1952 under the provisions of Army Regulation 615-366 (desertion); and
b. by issuing a new DD Form 214 showing that he was separated for the convenience of the Government under secretarial authority on 29 February 1952 and issued an honorable discharge.
BOARD VOTE:
___cmf__ ________ ________ GRANT AS STATED IN RECOMMENDATION
________ ________ ________ GRANT FORMAL HEARING
________ ___inw__ ___mkp__ DENY APPLICATION
______________________
CHAIRPERSON
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002072818C070403
The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein. However, the evidence of record clearly shows that he underwent a mental status evaluation and a psychiatrist determined that he able to distinguish right from wrong and to adhere to the right. He was convicted twice by a special court-martial of being AWOL and he continued to go AWOL until he had 253 days of lost time due to AWOL and confinement.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140006705
Also on 12 May 1952, the applicant's immediate commander requested a board of officers be convened under the provisions of Army Regulation 615-368 (Enlisted Men - Discharge - Unfitness (Undesirable Habits or Traits of Character)) for the purpose of determining the applicant's fitness for retention due to his habitual AWOL. Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 3-7b, states a general discharge is a separation from the Army under honorable conditions. The board found him unfit for retention and...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | 20110015318
The civil court sentenced him to imprisonment for 5 to 10 years. However, his service records show on 1 September 1955, the Commanding General, Headquarters, Infantry Center, Fort Benning, GA, ordered the applicant discharged under the provisions of section IV, Army Regulation 615-366 (Enlisted Personnel Discharges) by reason of civil conviction with the issuance of an Undesirable Discharge Certificate. On 13 November 1962, the Army Discharge Review Board denied his petition for an upgrade...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2001 | 2001061279C070421
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. EVIDENCE OF RECORD : The applicant's military records show: However, there is no evidence of record, and the applicant has provided no evidence, to support this contention.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2007 | 20070004115
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 9 August 2007 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20070004115 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 records available to the Army Board for Correction of Military Records were provided in part by the applicant and from reconstructed records. On 14 August 1953, the appropriate authority approved the applicant's...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090019025
Also available are the following: certificate of birth for R____ E____ R____; physical and mental examination for R____, R____ J____; WD AGO Form 53-59 (Enlisted Record and Report of Separation Undesirable Discharge) for R____, R____ J.; numerous discharge related documents; summary of neuropsychiatric evaluations of R____, R____ J., dated 1 November 1948; Mental Hygiene Consultation Services, 9th Infantry Division, Fort Dix, New Jersey, progress notes, dated 6 October 1949; certificate of...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140008045
The applicant states, in effect: * the FSM received an undesirable discharge without due consideration for his apparent documented traumatic brain injuries (TBI) * the FSMs records indicates he received numerous blows to the head * the science of TBI was not really understood by the FSM or the U.S. Army and no one should be held accountable for this lack of knowledge * the FSMs records indicates he had 16 months continuous service toward the Good Conduct Medal at the time of discharge on 1...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2015 | 20150001307
On 28 June 1953, the FSM's unit recommended a board of officers be convened to determine whether the FSM should be discharged under the provisions of Army Regulation 615-368 (Enlisted Personnel - Discharge - Unfitness). The certificate, dated 12 June 1953, issued by the Psychiatry and Neurology Service, USAH, Camp Atterbury, essentially stated: * the FSM's diagnosis was anti-social personality manifested by immaturity, impulsive behavior, lack of adequate standards of behavior, and...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2004 | 20040002755C070208
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 22 March 2005 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20040002755 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 petitioned the Army Discharge Review Board (ADRB) seeking a discharge upgrade. Had the applicant served in the Army of the 1960's during the Vietnam War, instead of in the Army of the 1950's during the...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080009455
Application for correction of military records (with supporting documents provided, if any). The evidence of record confirms that both the FSM and his mother provided the recruiter a copy of the FSMs Certificate of Baptism to confirm that he was at least 17 years of age at the time of his 1 December 1947 enlistment in the Army, as evidenced by the 29 November 1947 notarized affidavit on file. In addition, the FSM was found to be mentally and physically fit for military service by...