| Mr. Carl W. S. Chun | Director | |
| Ms. Deborah L. Brantley | Senior Analyst |
| Mr. Raymond V. O’Connor, Jr. | Chairperson | |
| Mr. Raymond J. Wagner | Member | |
| Mr. Donald P. Hupman, Jr. | Member |
APPLICANT REQUESTS: That his undesirable discharge be upgraded.
APPLICANT STATES: In effect, that he was young and naïve and did not use good judgement in his decisions and actions. He states that he has been a model citizen without any "derogatory record." In support of his request he submits a document confirming his church membership and which indicates that he and his spouse are "supportive and active" in the church.
EVIDENCE OF RECORD: The applicant's military records were likely lost or destroyed during the 1973 fire at the National Personnel Records Center. Information contained herein was reconstructed from alternative sources, including information provided by the applicant.
The applicant enlisted and entered active duty on 20 March 1946. He was 17 years old at the time of his enlistment but turned 18 years old in September 1946. The applicant served overseas between July 1946 and May 1949.
On 14 June 1949 the applicant was discharged under the provisions of Army Regulation 615-368. He was issued an Undesirable Discharge Certificate. His separation document indicates he had 13 days of lost time. Other than the applicant's separation document, the only records available to the Board were his service medical records.
His separation physical examination, conducted on 13 June 1949, contains a statement that the applicant's was cleared for separation, that "Board proceedings reviewed," and that the applicant was discharged for "undesirable traits."
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, 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 an undesirable discharge was normally considered appropriate.
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, the Board presumes that the applicant's administrative separation was accomplished in accordance with policies and procedures in effect at the time.
2. While the Board has taken cognizance of the applicant’s post service conduct and church membership, none of these factors, either individually or in sum, warrants the relief requested.
3. 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 that requirement.
4. The actions by the Army in this case were proper, and there is no doubt to be resolved in favor of the applicant.
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
__RVO__ __RJW __ ___DPH_ DENY APPLICATION
| CASE ID | AR2002066954 |
| SUFFIX | |
| RECON | YYYYMMDD |
| DATE BOARDED | 20020409 |
| TYPE OF DISCHARGE | (HD, GD, UOTHC, UD, BCD, DD, UNCHAR) |
| DATE OF DISCHARGE | YYYYMMDD |
| DISCHARGE AUTHORITY | AR . . . . . |
| DISCHARGE REASON | |
| BOARD DECISION | DENY |
| REVIEW AUTHORITY | |
| ISSUES 1. | 110.00 |
| 2. | |
| 3. | |
| 4. | |
| 5. | |
| 6. |
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002085638C070215
The regulation states that an individual separated under this regulation will be furnished an honorable or general discharge. The Board considered the applicant's request to change his discharge to Army Regulation 615-365 or Army Regulation 615-360. The applicant has failed to show through the evidence submitted or the evidence of record that the reason and authority for separation issued to him was in error or unjust.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2003 | 2003083514C070212
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: 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:
ARMY | BCMR | CY2012 | 20120009796
On 11 August 1949, the applicant appeared before a board of officers to determine if he should be discharged under the provisions of Army Regulation 615-368 for unfitness, repeated contraction of a venereal disease. His WD AGO Form 53-59 shows he was discharged from active duty on 3 November 1949, under the provisions of Army Regulation 615-368, by reason of unfitness - unclean habits including repeated venereal disease with an undesirable discharge. On 13 June 1956, he was discharged from...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002069367C070402
In accordance with Army Regulation 15-185, the application and the available military records pertinent to the corrective action requested were reviewed to determine whether to authorize a formal hearing, recommend that the records be corrected without a formal hearing, or to deny the application without a formal hearing if it is determined that insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate the existence of probable material error or injustice. APPLICANT REQUESTS: In...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002074235C070403
After reviewing the applicant's service record and hearing testimony from his chain of command, the board recommended that the applicant be He had completed 2 years, 10 months, and 20 days of creditable active Federal service on the enlistment under review and he had lost time due to being in confinement. On 23 August 1965, the Army Discharge Review Board (ADRB) denied the applicant’s request for an upgrade of his discharge after a records review.
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...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090021240
He also served 11 years as a constable. The applicant enlisted in the Army for 3 years in 1949. As a result, the Board recommends that all Department of the Army records of the individual concerned be corrected by: * voiding his undesirable discharge of 23 May 1952 * issuing to him an appropriate document to show he was discharged with a General Discharge on 23 May 1952 ___________x_____________ CHAIRPERSON I certify that herein is recorded the true and complete record of the proceedings...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2003 | 2003088484C070403
The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein. However, the report of separation provided by the applicant shows: 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:
ARMY | BCMR | CY2001 | 2001062553C070421
The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein. EVIDENCE OF RECORD : The applicant's military records show: The applicant was discharged from the Army under the provisions of Army Regulation 615-368 on 26 August 1954 with an undesirable discharge.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002074761C070403
APPLICANT STATES : In effect, that he completed his 3-year enlistment and that his combat service in Korea warrants the requested relief. The members of the board considered the applicant's entire record including his combat service and his awards and the fact that he had no other record of indiscipline other than the AWOLs. DISCUSSION : Considering all the evidence, allegations, and information presented by the applicant, together with the evidence of record, applicable law and...