| Mr. Carl W. S. Chun | Director | |
| Ms. Stephanie Thompkins | Analyst |
| Ms. Joann H. Langston | Chairperson | |
| Mr. George D. Paxson | Member | |
| Mr. Charles Gainor | Member |
APPLICANT REQUESTS: That his undesirable discharge (UD) be upgraded to honorable.
APPLICANT STATES: That his discharge was upgraded 6 months following his discharge. He has been issued an honorable discharge certificate from the Lebanon County Courthouse on 3 different occasions, and for some reason it has been downgraded to UD status. He also states that he served in combat in Korea and seeks nothing except an honorable certificate to place in his military awards showcase. He submits copies of a letter from the White House dated 24 August 2001, a reply to his National Personnel Records Center inquiry dated 4 October 2000, a partially destroyed copy of his DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty), and a copy of his DD Form 215 (Correction to DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) issued on 12 July 2000, in support of his request.
EVIDENCE OF RECORD: The applicant's military records were heavily damaged in the National Personnel Records Center fire of 1973. Information herein was obtained from those damaged records.
He enlisted in the Regular Army for 3 years on 20 March 1950. He served overseas in Korea from 15 August to 23 December 1950.
On 30 July 1951, a special court-martial convened for 2 specification of absence without leave (AWOL) (18 March to 26 May 1951 and 2 June to 30 June 1951). He was found guilty and sentenced to confinement at hard labor for 3 months and forfeiture of pay.
He was reported absent without leave (AWOL) on 1 November 1951 and dropped from the rolls.
On 8 May 1952, a special court-martial convened for 1 specification of AWOL (1 November 1951 to on or about 26 January 1952). He was found guilty and sentenced to confinement at hard labor for 4 months and forfeiture of pay.
On 14 August 1953, a summary court-martial convened for 1 specification of AWOL (3 August to 10 August 1953). He was found guilty and sentenced to confinement at hard labor for 25 days and forfeiture of pay.
On 6 November 1953, the applicant’s commander requested that the applicant be ordered before a board of officers for separation because he was a chronic offender and failed to assume his obligations.
A board of officers convened on 24 November 1953 and found the applicant unfit for further military service because of habits which render retention in the service undesirable.
He was discharged as a private, pay grade E-1, on 29 December 1953 under the provisions of Army Regulation 615-368 and issued an UD certificate. He had a total of 2 years, 2 months and 5 days net active service this period and 489 days lost time and 95 days lost time subsequent to normal expiration of term of service.
The applicant was awarded the Korean Service Medal with 2 Bronze Service Stars, the United Nations Service Medal, and the Combat Infantryman Badge for his service.
On 15 December 1998, he was issued a Certification of Military Service showing a UD.
On 12 July 2000, he was issued a DD Form 215 showing addition of the Purple Heart Award with Oak Leaf Cluster and the Korea Presidential Unit Citation Badge.
The applicant’s discharge proceedings are not a matter of record.
The applicant has not provided any evidence that the Lebanon County Courthouse upgraded his discharge on 3 different occasions after his separation from the Army.
Army Regulation 615-368, then in effect, set forth the policy and procedures for separation of enlisted personnel for unfitness. Unfitness included, in addition to misconduct and repeated petty offenses, habits and traits of character manifested by antisocial or amoral trends, chronic alcoholism, criminalism, drug addiction, pathological lying, homosexuality, sexual perversion, habitual shirking, and repeated venereal infections. Action to separate an individual was to be taken when, in the judgment of the commander, rehabilitation was unsuccessful, impractical or was unlikely to produce a satisfactory soldier. When separation for unfitness was warranted a UD was normally considered appropriate.
Regulatory guidance provides that an honorable discharge is a separation with honor. 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, or is otherwise so meritorious that any other characterization would be inappropriate.
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 view of the circumstances in this case, the applicant is not entitled to an upgrade of his discharge to honorable. He has not shown error, injustice, or inequity for the relief he now requests.
2. The Board notes the applicant’s contentions that his discharge was upgraded to honorable 6 months after his discharge and that he served honorably in combat in Korea. However, the applicant’s commander felt he was a chronic offender and failed to assume his obligations. Notwithstanding his honorable combat service and awards, in view of the applicant's overall record for his period of service after Korea, it does not appear that his UD was too severe.
3. It is also noted that his records do not show that his discharge was upgraded to honorable 6 months after his discharge. He also has not provided any evidence that the Lebanon County Courthouse has upgraded his discharge on 3 different occasions after his separation.
4. In the absence of evidence to the contrary, the applicant’s discharge was conducted in accordance with law and regulations applicable at the time.
5. 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.
6. 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
__gdp___ _cg_____ _jl_____ DENY APPLICATION
| CASE ID | AR2001063276 |
| SUFFIX | |
| RECON | |
| DATE BOARDED | 20020425 |
| TYPE OF DISCHARGE | |
| DATE OF DISCHARGE | |
| DISCHARGE AUTHORITY | |
| DISCHARGE REASON | |
| BOARD DECISION | DENY |
| REVIEW AUTHORITY | |
| ISSUES 1. | A70 |
| 2. | |
| 3. | |
| 4. | |
| 5. | |
| 6. |
ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090001542
Should the command deem his performance to be useless to the service the applicant was to be separated from the military service under the provisions of Army Regulation 615-368 (Enlisted Personnel - Discharge - Unfitness), by reason of unfitness. The applicant was credited with 1 year, 7 months, and 10 days of active military service. Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 3-7b, provides that a general discharge is a separation from the Army under honorable conditions.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2006 | 20060003453C070205
Army Regulation 615-368, also stated, in pertinent part, that a board of officers would recommend that the individual be either discharged because of unfitness, unsuitability, or retained in the service. It is also noted that the applicant now states he began drinking at the age of 12 and that alcohol was a large part of his life; however, his record of service shows that he served honorably and without any alcohol related incidents during the period 14 April 1948 to 13 April 1951. The...
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 | CY2002 | 2002073424C070403
On 18 April 1955, the appropriate authority approved the Board findings for discharge under the provisions of AR 615-368 with a UD. Accordingly, on 17 May 1955, the applicant was discharged from the service with a UD. However, in review of the applicant’s entire service record, the Board found that these accomplishments did not overcome the reason for discharge and characterization of service granted.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2004 | 2004103833C070208
The applicant requests that the undesirable discharge of her deceased husband, a former service member (FSM) be upgraded to honorable. The attending psychiatrist opined that the FSM was showing a chronic form of psychosis and as such he was not responsible for his conduct. The available records fail to show that this Board ever received or considered the FSM’s application for correction of military records dated 19 September 2002.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002067351C070402
The applicant states, in effect, that he was a young, 17-year old when he enlisted; that he served well in combat during the Korean War and received a head wound; that, upon reassignment from Korea to Japan, his personality changed and he started exhibiting bizarre behavior; and that, when he finally returned to the United States at 2 1/2 years of service and was given his first home leave, he went AWOL (absent without leave) for 5 or 6 months. Once the Department of the Air Force has...
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 | 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...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2001 | 2001065688C070421
In April 1955 the applicant appeared before a board of officers who recommended he be discharged for unfitness with an undesirable discharge. On 13 May 1955 the applicant was discharged under the provisions of Army Regulation 615-368 and issued an Undesirable Discharge Certificate. That all of the Department of the Army records related to this case be corrected by issuing the individual concerned a DD Form 214 for the period 23 January 1951 through 25 October 1953 which reflects...
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...