| Mr. Carl W. S. Chun | Director | |
| Ms. Rosa M. Chandler | Analyst |
| Mr. Fred N. Eichorn | Chairperson | |
| Mr. John E. Denning | Member | |
| Ms. Terry L. Placek | Member |
APPLICANT REQUESTS: That his undesirable discharge (UD) be upgraded to a fully honorable discharge (HD).
APPLICANT STATES: That in 1958 he requested that his discharge be upgraded and his request was granted in 1960.
EVIDENCE OF RECORD: The applicant’s military records are presumed lost or destroyed in the National Personnel Records Center fire of 1973. Information herein was obtained from a reconstructed record. The information available consists of: a NA Form 13038 (United States of America Certification of Military Service); Special Order Number 194, dated 16 August 1954, from Headquarters, Armor Center and Fort Knox, Fort Knox, Kentucky; a Morning Report dated 30 July 1953; and four letters of referral. The letters that were written on behalf of the applicant state that he has become a loving, caring, compassionate husband, and a sincere, law-abiding citizen devoted to caring for the welfare of others.
The applicant's records do not contain the facts and circumstances surrounding the discharge process. However, the NA Form 13038 that is available shows that he enlisted in the Regular Army on 29 July 1953 and he was separated in pay grade E-1 with a UD on 18 August 1954.
Special Order Number 194 shows that the applicant was discharged under the provisions of Army Regulation 615-368, due to unfitness (undesirable habits or traits of character). The available records do not clearly indicate the specific reason for his discharge.
The applicant's estimated service equals approximately 1 year and 19 days. It cannot be determined whether he had lost time due to being absent without leave (AWOL) or in confinement.
The evidence of record indicates the applicant applied to the Army Discharge Review Board in 1998, well beyond that board's 15-year statute of limitations.
Army Regulation 615-368, in effect at the time, set forth the basic policy and guidance for the prompt elimination of enlisted personnel when habits or traits of character rendered the soldier undesirable and rehabilitation was considered impossible due to the soldier's own misconduct. The appropriate authority could approve a HD, a general discharge, or a UD under this regulation.
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 available records show that the applicant was discharged under the provisions of Army Regulation 615-368 with a UD. Although the facts and circumstances surrounding the discharge process are missing, he would have consulted with defense counsel and counsel would have represented him before a board of officers or he would have voluntarily signed a statement indicating that he did not desire a personal appearance before such a board. He also would have been informed of the basis for the proposed discharge action. Further, he would have been informed that he could receive a UD and the ramifications of receiving such a discharge. Absent any evidence to the contrary, the Board presumes regularity in the discharge process
3. The Board acknowledges the applicant's successful transition to civilian life and noted the many accomplishments outlined in his application and in the documents with his application. However, the Board found that these post-service accomplishments did not overcome the reason for discharge or the characterization of service granted.
4. There is no evidence in the available record to indicate that the applicant's discharge was ever upgraded and he has submitted no evidence to prove otherwise.
5. 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
__fne____ __jed___ ___tlp ___ DENY APPLICATION
| CASE ID | AR2001052196 |
| SUFFIX | |
| RECON | |
| DATE BOARDED | 20010913 |
| TYPE OF DISCHARGE | UD |
| DATE OF DISCHARGE | 19540818 |
| DISCHARGE AUTHORITY | UNKNOWN |
| DISCHARGE REASON | UNKNOWN |
| BOARD DECISION | DENY |
| REVIEW AUTHORITY | |
| ISSUES 1. | 144.0000 |
| 2. | |
| 3. | |
| 4. | |
| 5. | |
| 6. |
ARMY | BCMR | CY2012 | 20120008681
The applicant's military service records are not available to the Board for review. In support of his application, the applicant provides the following documents: a. an NPRC letter, dated 30 March 2009, that forwarded an NA Form 13038 to the applicant; and b. a Certification of Military Service that shows the applicant was a member of the Regular Army from 16 November 1953 to 5 January 1955 and his service was terminated by an other than honorable discharge. Special orders discharged the...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140011746
The next day, the sergeant took him off the boxing team. His military records are not available to the Board for review. The regulation stated that discharge, if recommended, would be for unfitness, except that discharge because of unsuitability (under Army Regulation 615-369 (Enlisted Personnel - Discharge - Inaptitude or Unsuitability)), without referral to another board, might be recommended in borderline cases if military circumstances and the character of service rendered by the...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2013 | 20130015955
He provides: * Self-authored statement * Report of Proceedings by a Board of Officers with an extract of time lost, statement and certificate by commanding officer, and outpatient index * Special Orders Number 190, dated 16 August 1954 * Special Orders Number 197, dated 24 August 1954 * Special Orders Number 184, dated 9 August 1954 * VA Form 686c (Declaration of Marital Status), dated 1 November 1954 * WD AGO Form 53 (Enlisted Record and Report of Separation Honorable Discharge) * Two DD...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002074741C070403
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. APPLICANT STATES : In effect, that he finished his tour of duty and served 6 months of confinement, as a result of a special court-martial. On 14 January 1954, the applicant’s commander initiated a request to have the applicant appear before a board of officers to determine if he should be discharged under the provisions of Army...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | 20110023449
The applicant states that he enlisted in the Regular Army in 1952 and served for almost 2 years and was unjustly given an undesirable discharge because he was unable to read. Army Regulation 615-368, in effect at the time, set forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel by reason of unfitness. _______ _ _ 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...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | 20110015347
IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 1 March 2012 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20110015347 THE BOARD CONSIDERED THE FOLLOWING EVIDENCE: 1. The applicant's military records are not available to the Board for review. However, the records show he was 17 years of age at the time of his enlistment and 19 years old at the time of his discharge.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2013 | 20130009184
The applicant requests the characterization of service of her deceased husband, a former service member (FSM), be upgraded from an undesirable discharge to an honorable discharge. On 14 November 1954, his 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. On an unknown date in...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100008071
On 15 July 1954, his 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. The DD Form 214 he was issued shows he was discharged under the provisions of Army Regulation 615-368 with an undesirable discharge. The regulation stated that discharge, if recommended, would be for unfitness,...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2001 | 2001058419C070421
APPLICANT STATES : In effect, that his undesirable discharge was inequitable because he did not have a drinking problem when he entered the service and he was not offered a chance to rehabilitate himself when he obviously had a chronic and severe alcohol consumption problem that was exacerbated by his transfer to Germany. The board found that the applicant displayed traits of habits which rendered him unfit for further military service and recommended that he be discharged with an...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2003 | 2003088150C070403
This version of the regulation that came into effect 1 July 1947, the month after the applicant’s discharge, did authorize the issue of either a GD or UD for separation for unfitness (undesirable habits or traits of character). The Board notes the applicant’s contention that in order to be fair, the Board must grant him an honorable discharge based on the facts of his case being similar to case which resulted in the Board recommending an upgrade of a UD to a GD. However, the Board further...