| Mr. Carl W. S. Chun | Director | |
| Mr. Jessie B. Strickland | Analyst |
| Mr. John N. Slone | Chairperson | |
| Mr. Melvin H. Meyer | Member | |
| Mr. John T. Meixell | Member |
APPLICANT REQUESTS: That his undesirable discharge be upgraded to honorable.
APPLICANT STATES: That he served in combat in Korea from 1952 to 1953 and was reassigned to Fort Bragg, North Carolina. He goes on to state that his family notified him that his mother was sick and after twice being denied leave to go home, he went absent without leave (AWOL). He continues by stating that he was arrested by the military police less than 2 weeks later, was returned to Fort Bragg and was placed in the stockade for over a year before being given an undesirable discharge. He further states that this took place in 1956, when two things were prevalent in the United States Society; love for mother and no justice for a black man. He also states that he is now 68 years of age and desires to have a good discharge before he dies. He loves his country and would fight for both his mother and country again, if called to do so. In support of his application he submits a copy of his report of separation (DD Form 214) and four character references from his pastor, the county sheriff and two former employers.
EVIDENCE OF RECORD: The applicant's military records were destroyed in the 1973 fire at the National Personnel Records Center in St. Louis, Missouri, which destroyed millions of service records. However, the DD Form 214 provided by the applicant shows:
He enlisted on 16 April 1952 for a period of 3 years. He served 1 year, 1 month and 8 days of foreign service and was awarded the Korean Service Medal, the United Nations Service Medal and the National Defense Service Medal. He was reduced to the pay grade of E-1 on 5 August 1955.
The facts and circumstances surrounding his discharge are not present in the available records; however, his records do show that he was discharged at Camp Stewart, Georgia, under other than honorable conditions on 3 February 1956, under the provisions of Army Regulation 615-368, due to undesirable habits or traits of character. He had served 2 years, 8 months and 20 days of total active service and had 394 days of lost time.
There is no indication in the available records to show that he ever applied to the Army Discharge Review Board for an upgrade of his discharge within that board's 15-year statute of limitations.
Army Regulation 615-368, in effect at the time, set forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel by reason of unfitness. That regulation provided for the discharge of individuals who had demonstrated their unfitness by giving evidence of habits and traits of character manifested by misconduct. 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, it must be presumed that the applicant's administrative separation was accomplished in compliance with applicable regulations with no indication of procedural errors which would tend to jeopardize his rights.
2. The type of discharge directed and the reasons therefor were appropriate even given the limited information contained in the available records.
3. The applicant’s contentions and supporting documents have been noted by the Board. While the Board congratulates the applicant on his excellent post-service conduct, that in itself is not sufficiently mitigating when compared to his overall record of service and the amount of lost time he had.
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
___jm___ ___js____ __mm___ DENY APPLICATION
| CASE ID | AR2002080139 |
| SUFFIX | |
| RECON | YYYYMMDD |
| DATE BOARDED | 2003/03/25 |
| TYPE OF DISCHARGE | UD |
| DATE OF DISCHARGE | 1956/02/03 |
| DISCHARGE AUTHORITY | AR615-368 |
| DISCHARGE REASON | H&T/UNFIT |
| BOARD DECISION | DENY |
| REVIEW AUTHORITY | |
| ISSUES 1. 583 | 144.5000/A51.00 |
| 2. | |
| 3. | |
| 4. | |
| 5. | |
| 6. |
ARMY | BCMR | CY2005 | AR20050016538C070206
The applicant’s military records are not available to the Board for review. Meanwhile, the commander submitted a request to have the applicant appear before a board of officers to determine if he should be separated from the service under the provisions of Army Regulation 615-368 for unfitness due to undesirable habits or traits of character. There is no evidence in the available records to show that he ever applied to the Army Discharge Review Board for an upgrade of his discharge within...
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 | CY2006 | 20060004035C070205
All of the FSM’s military records are not available to the Board for review. The board determined that the circumstances of his case gave evidence of unfitness within the meaning of Army Regulation 615-368 and recommended that he receive an undesirable discharge for undesirable traits of character. However, the evidence of record shows that the board of officers considered the FSM’s overall good record of service up until the point of his misconduct, when it determined that his act of...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100019783
The applicant's military record is not available to the Board for review. The applicant's DD Form 214 also shows he was discharged under the provisions of Army Regulation 615-368 on 10 June 1955, with an undesirable discharge, after completing 1 year, 7 months, and 26 days of active military service with 386 days of time lost. In this instance, the "presumption of regularity" is based on Army Regulation 615-368, which provides the processing procedures for separation and specific guidance...
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 | 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 | 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 | 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 | CY2011 | 20110019232
The applicant's military records are not available to the Board for review. The regulation provided for the discharge of individuals who had demonstrated their unfitness by giving evidence of habits and traits of character manifested by misconduct. 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...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2006 | 20060008313C070205
The applicant’s military records are not available to the Board for review. There is no evidence in the available records to show that the applicant ever applied to the Army Discharge Review Board for an upgrade of his discharge within that board’s 15-year statute of limitations. Records show the applicant should have discovered the alleged error or injustice now under consideration on 9 December 1954; therefore, the time for the applicant to file a request for correction of any error...