| Mr. Carl W. S. Chun | Director | |
| Mr. W. W. Osborn, Jr. | Analyst |
| Mr. Raymond V. O'Connor, Jr. | Chairperson | |
| Ms. Karen A. Heinz | Member | |
| Ms. Barbara J. Ellis | Member |
APPLICANT REQUESTS: That his undesirable discharge be upgraded.
APPLICANT STATES: In effect, that he completed his 3-year enlistment and that his combat service in Korea warrants the requested relief.
He also states that he has been an ordained minister for 22 years. This is accepted as an implied contention that his post-service behavior and conduct warrant the requested relief.
EVIDENCE OF RECORD: The applicant's military records were lost or destroyed in the National Personnel Records Center fire of 1973. Information herein was obtained from reconstructed personnel records. The only available records are those associated with the proceedings of a board of officers and the medical history he provided for his separation medical examination. These appear to have been in the custody of the [then] Veterans Administration at the time of the fire.
The applicant enlisted for 3 years and entered active duty on 23 November 1948. He served in Korea for 11 months and was awarded the Combat Infantryman Badge, the Purple Heart and the Korean Service Medal with five bronze service stars. Following his service in Korea, he received three special court-martial convictions for three periods of absence without leave (AWOL) totaling 347 days.
On 5 February 1954, the applicant appeared, with counsel, before a board of officers and elected to present nothing in his own behalf. 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. The board members found that his record evidenced habits that rendered his retention in the service undesirable. They recommended that he be separated with an undesirable discharge due to unfitness. The officer exercising general court-martial jurisdiction approved the findings and recommendation.
On 19 February 1954 the applicant was separated with an undesirable discharge under the provisions of Army Regulation 615-308. In 5 years, 2 months and 26 days he had accumulated 3 years and 18 days of creditable service and 633 days lost time due to AWOL and confinement.
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, and habitual shirking. 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. The applicant's record of combat service as evidenced by his awards, including the Combat Infantryman Badge, the Purple Heart and the Korean Service Medal with five bronze service stars and the fact that he actually accumulated 3 years and 18 days of creditable service have been noted. However this Board concludes that these factors do not outweigh his record of indiscipline, which included three court-martial convictions, 347 days of AWOL and a total of 633 days lost time.
2. The applicant's administrative separation was accomplished in compliance with applicable regulations with no indication of procedural errors that would tend to jeopardize his rights. The type of discharge directed and the reasons therefore were appropriate considering all the facts of the case.
3. The applicant's implied claim of good post-service conduct and behavior has been noted, but this unsubstantiated assertion does not demonstrate that the requested relief is warranted.
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
__RVO__ __KAH__ __BJE___ DENY APPLICATION
| CASE ID | AR2002074761 |
| SUFFIX | |
| RECON | |
| DATE BOARDED | 20021024 |
| TYPE OF DISCHARGE | UD |
| DATE OF DISCHARGE | 19540219 |
| DISCHARGE AUTHORITY | AR635-368 . . . . . |
| DISCHARGE REASON | A50.00 |
| BOARD DECISION | DENY |
| REVIEW AUTHORITY | |
| ISSUES 1. | A72.07 |
| 2. | A92.21 |
| 3. | |
| 4. | |
| 5. | |
| 6. |
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 | CY2014 | 20140005503
He returned to the Continental United States in March 1954. d. In September 1954, he was convicted by an SPCM for being AWOL from 12 June to 4 September 1954. e. In February 1955, he was convicted by an SPCM for being AWOL from 24 January to 16 February 1955. f. In March 1955, while in confinement, the FSMs commanding officer requested the FSM be required to appear before a board of officers convened under the provisions of Army Regulation 615-368 (Undesirable Habits or Traits of Character...
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 | 20120004541
Application for correction of military records (with supporting documents provided, if any). There is no evidence of record indicating the applicant applied to the Army Discharge Review Board for an upgrade of his discharge within that board's 15-year statute of limitations. Based on his extensive disciplinary history, the applicant's record did not support the issuance of an honorable or general discharge by the separation authority at the time and does not support an upgrade at this late date.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140019683
The FSM's complete military records are not available to the Board for review. On 12 February 2013, the ABCMR considered his petition for a discharge upgrade but found no evidence of error or injustice and denied his request. 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...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2013 | 20130002193
The applicants military records are not available to the Board for review. A DA Form 37 (Report of Proceedings of Board of Officers), dated 10 February 1955, shows a board of officers convened on 8 February 1955 and recommended separating the applicant under the provisions of Army Regulation 615-368 (Enlisted Men - Discharge - Unfitness (Undesirable Habits or Traits of Character)). There is no evidence in the applicant's military service records and he has not provided evidence that shows...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2001 | 2001063402C070421
The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein. When separation for unfitness was warranted an undesirable discharge was normally considered appropriate. There is no evidence, and the applicant has not provided any, that his discharge proceedings were not conducted in accordance with established laws and regulations in effect at the time.
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 | CY2009 | 20090016650
The applicant requests upgrade of his undesirable discharge to a general, under honorable conditions discharge. The applicants military record shows he enlisted in the Regular Army in pay grade E-1 on 20 February 1951, for 3 years. However, his records contain a copy of his DD Form 214 which shows he was discharged on 23 September 1955 in pay grade E-1, under the provisions of Army Regulation 615-368, with an undesirable discharge.
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.