| Mr. Carl W. S. Chun | Director | |
| Ms. Wanda L. Waller | Analyst |
| Ms. Margaret K. Patterson | Chairperson | |
| Mr. Thomas B. Redfern | Member | |
| Ms. Regan K. Smith | Member |
APPLICANT REQUESTS: That his undesirable discharge be upgraded to honorable.
APPLICANT STATES: In effect, that when he returned from Korea he was treated like a second class citizen. As a result of his youth, he rebelled and went absent without leave (AWOL) on several different occasions. He knows he made mistakes and regrets his decisions. In support of his application, he submits a letter of explanation, dated 25 June 2001 and a copy of his DD Form 214 (Report of Separation from the Armed Forces of the United States).
EVIDENCE OF RECORD: The applicant's military records show:
The applicant’s military records were destroyed or lost during the National Personnel Records Center fire of 1973. Records available to the Board were obtained from alternate sources and show that the applicant enlisted on 4 March 1952 for a period of 3 years. He served as an AAA gun crewman in Korea.
The facts and circumstances surrounding the applicant’s discharge are not present in the available records. However, his DD Form 214 shows that on
16 November 1955 he was discharged under the provisions of Army Regulation 615-368 for unfitness due to undesirable habits or traits of character. He had served 2 years, 8 months and 2 days of total active service with 378 days lost.
Army Regulation 615-368, in effect at the time, set forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel for unfitness. The regulation provided, in pertinent part, for the separation of personnel for the following reasons: (1) gives evidence of habits or traits of character manifested by antisocial or amoral trend, chronic alcoholism, criminalism, drug addiction, pathological lying, homosexuality, sexual perversion, or misconduct; (2) unclean habits, including repeated venereal infections; (3) repeatedly committed petty offenses not warranting trial by court-martial; (4) habitual shirker; and (4) recommended for discharge by a board of medical examiners, not because of a physical or mental disability, but because he possesses a psychopathic (antisocial) personality disorder or defect, or is classified as having “no disease” by the board, and his record of service reveals frequent disciplinary actions because of infractions of regulations and commission of offenses, and/or it is clearly evident his complaints are unfounded and are made with the intent of avoiding service. The regulation also provided that when discharged because of unfitness an undesirable discharge will be furnished.
Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 3-7, provides that an honorable discharge is a separation with honor and entitles the recipient to benefits provided by law. The honorable characterization is appropriate when the quality of the member’s service generally has met the standards of acceptable conduct and performance of duty for Army personnel (emphasis added), or is otherwise so meritorious that any other characterization would be clearly inappropriate. Whenever there is doubt, it is to be resolved in favor of the individual.
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 the absence of evidence to the contrary, it must be presumed that the applicant’s separation was administratively correct and in conformance with applicable regulations. Accordingly, the type of discharge directed and the reasons for separation appear to be appropriate.
2. The Board noted that the applicant’s DD Form 214 shows that he had
378 days of lost time and determined that his quality of service did not meet the standards of acceptable conduct and performance of duty for Army personnel. Therefore, the applicant is not entitled to an honorable discharge.
3. The applicant failed to convince the Board through the evidence submitted that his discharge was unjust and should be upgraded.
4. 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.
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
MKP____ TBR_____ RKS_____ DENY APPLICATION
| CASE ID | AR2001059335 |
| SUFFIX | |
| RECON | |
| DATE BOARDED | 20010807 |
| TYPE OF DISCHARGE | (UD) |
| DATE OF DISCHARGE | 19551116 |
| DISCHARGE AUTHORITY | AR 615-368 |
| DISCHARGE REASON | Unfitness due to undesirable habits or traits of character |
| BOARD DECISION | (DENY) |
| REVIEW AUTHORITY | |
| ISSUES 1. | 110.0200 |
| 2. | |
| 3. | |
| 4. | |
| 5. | |
| 6. |
ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090013335
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 applicants failure to timely file. On 21 March 1955, the applicant's immediate commander requested a board of officers be convened under the provisions of Army Regulation 615-368 (Enlisted Men - 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 | CY2012 | 20120017703
The military medical officer stated the applicant was undesirable as a Soldier. On 18 January 1956, 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. The board found him unfit for retention and recommended his discharge with an Undesirable Discharge Certificate.
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 | CY2011 | 20110001288
The applicant's military records are not available to the Board for review. However, his DD Form 214 shows he was discharged on 9 February 1956 under the provisions of Army Regulation 615-368 (Enlisted Men - Discharge - Unfitness (Undesirable Habits or Traits of Character)) with an undesirable discharge. The applicant's contention that his discharge should be upgraded and the evidence he provided as well as his available service record, including his service in Germany, was carefully considered.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | 20110018514
The applicant's complete military records are not available to the Board for review. A duly-constituted DD Form 214 shows he was discharged on 18 June 1954 under the provisions of Army Regulation 615-368 with an undesirable discharge. However, his DD Form 214 shows he was discharged on 18 June 1954 under the provisions of Army Regulation 615-368 with an undesirable discharge.
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 | CY2002 | 2002069463C070402
EVIDENCE OF RECORD : The FSM’s military records were not available to the Board for review. However, the separation document confirms that he was discharged under the provisions of Army Regulation 615-368, by reason of unfit habits and traits of character that rendered retention in service undesirable, and that he received an UD. There is no evidence that the Army Discharge Review Board received the FSM’s request for an upgrade to his discharge within its 15-year statute of limitations.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090012053
The board of officers found that the evidence showed the applicant to have habits which rendered retention in the military undesirable and recommended that the applicant be discharged from the service because of unfitness and that he be given an Undesirable Discharge Certificate. Accordingly, the applicant was discharged on 29 April 1954 and issued an Undesirable Discharge Certificate. When authorized, it is issued to a Soldier whose military record is satisfactory but not sufficiently...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080011763
The board found that the applicant gives evidence of habits and gives evidence of traits of character which rendered retention in the service undesirable and recommended that the applicant be discharged from the service because of unfitness and that he be furnished an undesirable discharge. Evidence of record shows the applicant completed 3 years, 3 months, and 9 days of creditable active service when he was discharged. Although the applicants daughter contends that they have no...